Talk:Taiwan
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Taiwan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39Auto-archiving period: 30 days ![]() |
![]() | Important notice: Prior consensus has decided that Taiwan is to be referred to as a country.
Changes to the article to refer to Taiwan as a state, island, province of China, or other definition are not permitted and may be reverted. See here for the 2020 RfC in which editors reached this decision. |
![]() | Guidelines for the article Taiwan
The following guidelines have been established by consensus and convention:
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about "country" vs "state", and "Taiwan" vs "Republic of China", and "Taiwan is a part of China", and "Taiwan is a province of China". Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting on that topic. |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | Other talk page banners | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taiwan is an island country
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Taiwan is an island country. It's even listed on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_island_countries as such, and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Taiwan begins with "Taiwan is an island country in East Asia." Other articles like that of Japan or Madagascar also begin with "X is an island country in Y / off the coast of Z..."). It's not strictly necessary but how come this article doesn't begin with "Taiwan is an island country"?
This is pretty much an edit request (please edit the article with this suggestion if it's valid) but I'm more interested if there's a reason why it's not already since I'd assume it to be obvious. Sorry if it's been brought up before, I did check the recent archives of this talk page but couldn't find anything. Thank you 2A02:C7E:3188:4C00:D9C6:AE8B:9464:59DB (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hope it's clear this is a geographical, not political, issue 2A02:C7E:3188:4C00:D9C6:AE8B:9464:59DB (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes that is clear, i see no reason not to add island. Slatersteven (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Not done See the 2020 RfC. Remsense诉 16:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- This request does still call it a country. Slatersteven (talk) 16:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- If RfC participants thought island country was permissible, they likely would've specified. Very few did so. Remsense诉 16:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- That would be an assumption, not covered by the close which only covers the issue of county, which this does not change. I can only go by myself, but I try to answer the RFC question asked, not any ancillary matters (so if asked whether we call dogs animals I would say yes, not yes but also call them 4-legged) Slatersteven (talk) 16:37, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm only an IP and I'm just repeating Slatersteven's point but I would disagree, the debate was over whether Taiwan should be referred to on Wikipedia as a "country" or as a (sovereign) "state", not over the geography. If Hungary's status was disputed for some reason you wouldn't bother specifying in an RFC that you believe it as a "landlocked country" in place of a "landlocked state", right? You would just comment "I think Hungary should be called a country", I don't think the fact that most didn't specify in the 2020 RFC is worth much. Adding "island" does nothing to dispute Taiwan's political status. Ultimately this is only a minor and not-necessary change and it's up to actual editors like you though. Thank you 2A02:C7E:3188:4C00:D9C6:AE8B:9464:59DB (talk) 17:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- If RfC participants thought island country was permissible, they likely would've specified. Very few did so. Remsense诉 16:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- This request does still call it a country. Slatersteven (talk) 16:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes that is clear, i see no reason not to add island. Slatersteven (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- I mean we can but in general it can get a bit wordy... And there is wide variation across the project, for example we use just country for Indonesia and for the Phillipines we use "archipelagic country" but with a link to archipelagic state. Personally I would rather that they all just say country in the first sentence of the lead and do geography elsewhere in the lead. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Agree it doesn't matter much, the lead is clear it is made of islands, the inclusion of it as an adjective or not is just flavouring. CMD (talk) 02:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree it is just flavoring, but I think “island country” would be quite descriptive and helpful both in the first sentence and in the short description. I think we all agree this would still satisfy the 2020 RfC consensus to use “country.” Butterdiplomat (talk) 03:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- Certainly agree it doesn't affect the RfC result either way. CMD (talk) 03:24, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- I would be in favour of the change, but some people have objected to it in the past. As I recall, the arguments were (a) it's not just one island, but several little ones too, and (b) claims to the mainland. Of course the first is true of
all theother island countries too. Kanguole 12:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC)- Just add the link.. Island country ....not a big deal and leads readers to info like "a country whose primary territory consists of one or more islands or parts of islands. " and a map that talks about this small country. Moxy🍁 12:16, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t think claims to the “mainland” (a historical and partisan claim) should dictate how the country is factually described. This description also does not prevent the historical ROC claims from being included elsewhere in the article. Butterdiplomat (talk) 23:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree it is just flavoring, but I think “island country” would be quite descriptive and helpful both in the first sentence and in the short description. I think we all agree this would still satisfy the 2020 RfC consensus to use “country.” Butterdiplomat (talk) 03:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- Agree it doesn't matter much, the lead is clear it is made of islands, the inclusion of it as an adjective or not is just flavouring. CMD (talk) 02:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- Saying Taiwan ROC is an island country is different from saying ROC controls the island. Making them equivalent sounds too much like a political position about its territory. I don't think the first sentence of this article should implicitly promote one. Leave "island" out. The third and fourth sentences already describe the situation as-is. "The territories controlled by the ROC consist of 168 islands with a combined area of 36,193 square kilometres (13,974 square miles). The main island of Taiwan, also known as Formosa..." CurryCity (talk) 13:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t see the discrepancy or political position. The ROC is (as it stands and as described, like you say, in the next few sentences) an island country. It is a country (which is a political statement deemed accurate from various RfC processes), and it is made of islands. What do you feel is the position the statement implicitly promotes? Butterdiplomat (talk) 15:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- Seconding Butterdiplomat, need some explanation of what you mean by this. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- The article already begins with calling Taiwan a country, not a state or just land controlled by the ROC. That's a political position of its territory already. Island countries aren't any more or less legitimate than continental countries, why would calling Taiwan an island country be changing anything? 2A02:C7E:3188:4C00:71EA:103B:48DE:BCF8 (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think the major problem with disagreement on marking the ROC as island country because quite amount of people consider the concept of Taiwan and the Republic of China are not exactly the same, despite being largely overlapping in their current territorial extent. Many people especially those pro-KMT advocate the idea that the ROC still owns sovereignty over Mainland China or Mongolia in constitutional terms. Actually this page once had a discussion not long ago regarding the constitutional claims made by the ROC (see Talk:Taiwan/Archive 39#"Current ROC territorial claims" vs. "historical ROC territorial claims"), the country template show a map [1] depicting a “historical territorial claim” without any reliable supporting sources. Some editors have expressed their concerns about the constitutional terms which did not exactly apply any specific territorial extent to the ROC sovereign claims. Therefore, in practice we may call it an island country, but somehow the wikipedia decided to take a neutral ground on that definition, which was “country” as a consensus in common, but we do not give any explicit definition for the ROC being a state claiming to be a country that beyond the islands of Taiwan or a country limited to these islands. Sheherherhers (talk) 00:14, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Very well put, thank you. Should "island country" ideally be removed from the article on the geography of Taiwan and Taiwan from both the list and map on the list of island countries? 2A02:C7E:3188:4C00:71EA:103B:48DE:BCF8 (talk) 10:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is not exactly what I mean… What I’m saying is that the Wikipedia allows somewhat ambiguous interpretation in controversial Topics such as Taiwan. It’s not necessary to address a descriptive term as “island country” or “continental country” upon any national-related articles when an inclusive term as simple as “country” that can be accepted by general consensus. So we do not have to make exclusive use for one definition to prevail one another and creating more unnecessary issues. The claims of the ROC is also a political myth that sided by certain group which is just represented as one-side political stance, using country instead of island country does not mean to endorse that position. If the general consensus had a decision to stick to “country”, the Wikipedia would remain a neutral ground on that basis. Sheherherhers (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- And I also looked into the topic of List of island countries. The content has explained very clear that the reason for the inclusion of Taiwan, as Taiwan being “a state has "de facto" control over territories entirely on the islands”. Sheherherhers (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really think this is the problem, exactly. States and countries are never exactly the same thing—one is an abstraction describing a self-contained administrative, legal, and general political structure, and the other is a greater abstraction encompassing additional, more transcendent elements, e.g. of identity. In English parlance, people feel they are countrymen, they might say they identify with a country—but it would be a much narrower, more cynical statement to say that one is loyal to a state. COMMONNAME aside, this is why it makes sense to call Taiwan a country—because it is one, regardless of the legal fiction of any state.
- That said, I don't agree with your formulation because the article isn't about the Republic of China as such, it's about the country Taiwan. There's a hidden conflation there like there is with every article about a modern state because that's what people expect—the article will include the entire political history of the region where the state now is, etc—but it's still a distinction to make.
- I'm not personally opposed to calling Taiwan an island country, I just think it's better to be as parsimonious as possible with the rules for pragmatic purposes, given how many gray-faith and bad-faith editors constantly land on this talk page. Remsense诉 10:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think it is worth the discussion. Adding “island country” to the short description and the first sentence brings the page in alignment with other island countries, like Japan or Sri Lanka or New Zealand. For the same reason the term is used on the pages, it would make sense here. As a very minor point, “island country” distinguishes Taiwan from Thailand (unfortunately still often confused today) more quickly in the search results.
- Just to play devil’s advocate to your point about gray- and bad-faith editors - what exactly do you think their argument would be? Since the term doesn’t change the substance of the lede, the fact that it may attract bad-faith comments makes it worth the clarification IMO. It feels like there is a reason bad-faith editors would want to avoid the clarification, and we shouldn’t cave to their agenda. Butterdiplomat (talk) 12:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- These are fair points. Pencil me in as neutral. Remsense诉 12:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Very well put, thank you. Should "island country" ideally be removed from the article on the geography of Taiwan and Taiwan from both the list and map on the list of island countries? 2A02:C7E:3188:4C00:71EA:103B:48DE:BCF8 (talk) 10:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think the major problem with disagreement on marking the ROC as island country because quite amount of people consider the concept of Taiwan and the Republic of China are not exactly the same, despite being largely overlapping in their current territorial extent. Many people especially those pro-KMT advocate the idea that the ROC still owns sovereignty over Mainland China or Mongolia in constitutional terms. Actually this page once had a discussion not long ago regarding the constitutional claims made by the ROC (see Talk:Taiwan/Archive 39#"Current ROC territorial claims" vs. "historical ROC territorial claims"), the country template show a map [1] depicting a “historical territorial claim” without any reliable supporting sources. Some editors have expressed their concerns about the constitutional terms which did not exactly apply any specific territorial extent to the ROC sovereign claims. Therefore, in practice we may call it an island country, but somehow the wikipedia decided to take a neutral ground on that definition, which was “country” as a consensus in common, but we do not give any explicit definition for the ROC being a state claiming to be a country that beyond the islands of Taiwan or a country limited to these islands. Sheherherhers (talk) 00:14, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- There are different theories as to the actual territory of ROC and whether that has changed. Wikipedia should not pick and side with one. So the first sentence should not go into the territory of Republic of China, since parts of ROC and Taiwan have been combined into this article.
- Remsense touched on the difference between state in the political sense and country in the general sense, political or not. Equating ROC which is the name of a state with island country is not supported, although you may be able to argue that ROC controls the island country of Taiwan including minor islands.
- It's 2024. Not that many English speakers are still confused about Thailand and Taiwan. CurryCity (talk) 04:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- The lede already defines Taiwan as a country, which was the RfC consensus. To Remsense’s point, there is a distinction between country and state, and the article is already about the country. So, it is consistent to then extend the description to say island country.
- The article is also about the modern state of the ROC, the actual territory of which is not really in dispute (at least the vast majority of it). The only dispute is one of official recognition, which is a matter of political status and also doesn’t have any bearing on the description of the island country in any case. Butterdiplomat (talk) 11:34, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Equating the modern ROC with island country is just one of the different competing theories. Its territory is disputed politically within Taiwan, by China, and internationally. Wikipedia should document disagreements, not advance one interpretation in the first sentence of a major article. CurryCity (talk) 13:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- People have niche theories about plenty of topics, and we weigh them accordingly per WP:DUEWEIGHT. Remsense诉 13:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- According to the text in Britannica, the first difference I notice between Thailand and Taiwan is that Thailand is a country[2] but Taiwan is not[3]. It's an island, but the ROC is not an island. It's the entity that controls Taiwan etc. CurryCity (talk) 14:17, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- See the 2020 RfC, as the exhaustive survey of RS has been done there already. Again, we're specifically talking about whether "island country" is acceptable in addition to "country". The other dimensions you seem to have a hankering to discuss have already been deliberated and decided on. Remsense诉 14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- And Britannica has not surveyed "reliable sources" better than a few Wikipedia editors did back in 2020? CurryCity (talk) 14:41, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- How am I supposed to know that? It's pretty daft to insinuate our editorial process hinges on what we assume another encyclopedia's editorial process probably is.Remsense诉 14:42, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- I have to say, using Britannia as well-reliable source is not definite. First, Taiwan in this article or people nowadays referred to, is not just focusing on one island obviously. The context explained it quite well, “The territories controlled by the ROC consist of 168 islands with a combined area of 36,193 square kilometres. The main island of Taiwan, also known as Formosa, has an area of 35,808 square kilometres”. It’s quite clear that the concept of Taiwan here we input referring to the governing authority that currently controlled 168 island with island of Taiwan as major base. And I think for the same article in Britannia which does mean the same for the actual-ruled authority rather than focusing on one major island only. Just like Great Britain said by peoples, frequently referred to the whole UK rather than an island. Therefore, by saying that the definition of Taiwan is just “an island” apparently wrong, even for Britannia. Neither of Wikipedia nor Britannia treat it as a mere geographical topic in regards to Taiwan.
- Besides, Britannia did sort Taiwan in their category for “countries of the world”, you can look into the same page again and check the headings. Sheherherhers (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Are you trying to re-litigate the previous discussion about whether Taiwan is a country or not? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, I haven't seen any source saying the ROC is an island country. CurryCity (talk) 14:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Voters in the Republic of China (ROC), the official name for Taiwan, a prosperous island country 100 miles off the coast of mainland China, go to the polls on Jan. 13 to replace term-limited President Tsai Ing-wen and parliamentarians for the country’s unicameral legislature." CMD (talk) 17:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- They tend to say Taiwan is an island country or conflate it with ROC, which is understandable for a campus newspaper. CurryCity (talk) 16:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- This article currently states Taiwan is a country. It states Taiwan is officially known as the ROC. The two are not contradictory as you suggest. I don’t think you fully understand that Taiwan is both the name of the island and the ROC’s common name.
- There are some other references: Washington Examiner, published work, Timeline Daily. Butterdiplomat (talk) 16:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- They tend to say Taiwan is an island country or conflate it with ROC, which is understandable for a campus newspaper. CurryCity (talk) 16:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Voters in the Republic of China (ROC), the official name for Taiwan, a prosperous island country 100 miles off the coast of mainland China, go to the polls on Jan. 13 to replace term-limited President Tsai Ing-wen and parliamentarians for the country’s unicameral legislature." CMD (talk) 17:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- And Britannica has not surveyed "reliable sources" better than a few Wikipedia editors did back in 2020? CurryCity (talk) 14:41, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think there is some confusion here. The name “Taiwan” can refer to an island, but it actually refers to a country in this article. The island country that we are referring to clearly applies to the latter. Adding “island” as a descriptor does not contradict the current formulation, and it is clearly a helpful descriptor if even frequent editors of the page don’t see this as an obvious fact (i.e., it is not redundant). Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- The confusion is not limited to Wikipedia. Maybe a dozen of editors knows precisely that for the purpose of this article, we refer to the ROC as Taiwan. However, when outside sources write something about Taiwan as an island or a country, they can have a very different concept about the terms. This also confuses many new editors and readers.
- The main topic of this article appears to be the polity ROC, referred to as Taiwan for convenience. So Taiwan here really means ROC. CurryCity (talk) 16:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, this article is about the country Taiwan. Just like every other country article, it conflates the polity and the geographical region considerably, but just like every other country article it is not actually secretly about only one of those things. Remsense诉 16:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Taiwan is a common name for ROC" has been used by several editors here as a rationale to change mentions of ROC to Taiwan on thousands of articles. All of a sudden, this main article is not really about ROC? CurryCity (talk) 17:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Usually those mentions are talking about the country Taiwan, I imagine. Remsense诉 17:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Its only about the ROC as much as it overlaps with the modern political polity of Taiwan... For the earlier period we have Republic of China (1912–1949) etc. In the modern context there is no difference between "The Republic of China is an island country" and "Taiwan is an island country" Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Pretty much just like we have French Fourth Republic as well as France. Remsense诉 17:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Modern France is a successor of the fourth republic. For Taiwan and ROC this is still ambiguous. CurryCity (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's something you have to work out for yourself. The sources aren't really so conflicted about it, thankfully. Remsense诉 17:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Most sources just parrot this article "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China", or "Republic of China, the official name of Taiwan". CurryCity (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, this article parrots those sources, not the other way around. CMD (talk) 17:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Most sources just parrot this article "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China", or "Republic of China, the official name of Taiwan". CurryCity (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's something you have to work out for yourself. The sources aren't really so conflicted about it, thankfully. Remsense诉 17:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Modern France is a successor of the fourth republic. For Taiwan and ROC this is still ambiguous. CurryCity (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Why would the country of Taiwan if it's not ROC have a mainland period then? CurryCity (talk) 17:19, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan does not have a mainland period, are you being confused by the see also? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- You might need to ask your pastor about that one. The idea of a country is not atemporal. Remsense诉 17:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- @CurryCity, with due respect, would you mind answering my question below about your argument? It feels like you are jumping around quite a bit, and I would just like to understand what your concern is. Butterdiplomat (talk) 17:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not intentionally jumping around. CurryCity (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Pretty much just like we have French Fourth Republic as well as France. Remsense诉 17:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Taiwan is a common name for ROC" has been used by several editors here as a rationale to change mentions of ROC to Taiwan on thousands of articles. All of a sudden, this main article is not really about ROC? CurryCity (talk) 17:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, this article is about the country Taiwan. Just like every other country article, it conflates the polity and the geographical region considerably, but just like every other country article it is not actually secretly about only one of those things. Remsense诉 16:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- See the 2020 RfC, as the exhaustive survey of RS has been done there already. Again, we're specifically talking about whether "island country" is acceptable in addition to "country". The other dimensions you seem to have a hankering to discuss have already been deliberated and decided on. Remsense诉 14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- According to the text in Britannica, the first difference I notice between Thailand and Taiwan is that Thailand is a country[2] but Taiwan is not[3]. It's an island, but the ROC is not an island. It's the entity that controls Taiwan etc. CurryCity (talk) 14:17, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Just so I can properly understand your argument, are you opposed only to (1) stating “island country” in the first sentence or short description, (2) stating it anywhere in the lede, (3) implying it at all, or (4) stating Taiwan is a country at all? Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Should not equate or imply that ROC is an island (or a group of islands 17:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)) in wikivoice, because that is one of several political positions. CurryCity (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- “Island country” does not imply a single island, if that is what you are concerned about. Butterdiplomat (talk) 17:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Not exactly what I meant but see my changes above. CurryCity (talk) 17:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Before we run through the cycle again: we pick the majority view and work with it in wikivoice per WP:DUE. What are the other positions here? State them clearly.Remsense诉 17:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- You still don't get it. When outside sources write about Taiwan being an island country, they are not necessarily implying anything about ROC's territory. We have this problem because editors and articles on Wikipedia use Taiwan as a name for ROC.
- WP:DUE means majority view of RS proportional to their quality, not the number of votes. Otherwise with so much content online, a point can be made about any political position. CurryCity (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- And what RS hold the view that the Republic of China currently includes a territory other than Taiwan and minor islands? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- “Island country” does not imply a single island, if that is what you are concerned about. Butterdiplomat (talk) 17:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Should not equate or imply that ROC is an island (or a group of islands 17:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)) in wikivoice, because that is one of several political positions. CurryCity (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- People have niche theories about plenty of topics, and we weigh them accordingly per WP:DUEWEIGHT. Remsense诉 13:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Equating the modern ROC with island country is just one of the different competing theories. Its territory is disputed politically within Taiwan, by China, and internationally. Wikipedia should document disagreements, not advance one interpretation in the first sentence of a major article. CurryCity (talk) 13:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
They are not saying ROC is a group of islands either. They say it controls Taiwan etc, which is how this article already explains the situation. Look at the proposal objectively, it's a major change in meaning to the first sentence of a major article despite the long-standing way things have been phrased. CurryCity (talk) 18:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- When we state Taiwan is an island country, we're not saying anything about the ROC's territory either. Saying France is a European country doesn't say anything about the French Republic's territory in South America or the Pacific. Remsense诉 17:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've said this before. Taiwan is generally used to stand in for ROC on Wikipedia. French overseas territory is not an analogy for "mainland territory" of Taiwan, the history and geography are completely different. CurryCity (talk) 18:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan is a country. Most of the time when Taiwan is linked on Wikipedia, it is referring to the country Taiwan. Remsense诉 18:12, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan is used to stand in for the ROC polity in the modern context, because the country and state are often conflated, as in other country articles. However, Taiwan the island country has a history that predates the ROC as well. In any case, the ROC's territories are currently in fact made of islands, and this is reflected in the primary map shown for the ROC. Any interpretation otherwise could probably be considered original research or simply unsupported by RS. Any political position that the ROC should control more or less than an island country is also not relevant. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:50, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Saying Tawian ROC is an island country in the first sentence would sound too much like Wikipedia itself supports a certain interpretation of Taiwan's status or even independence from parts of the pan-green camp, specifically the theory that "Republic of China is Taiwan", at the expense of other viewpoints on the matter. CurryCity (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- In English, Republic of China and Taiwan are currently two different names for the same polity. That polity is currently an island country. If this English language fact is picked up on by this or that political campaign, that is not really relevant to this page. CMD (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thats the mainstream pan-blue POV these days as well... The view that you seem to want us to respect is a WP:FRINGE one and if it isn't you can disprove that by providing high quality reliable sources which present that POV. Besides for fringe extremists both pan-blue and pan-green camps agree that Taiwan is independent, they just disagree on what form that independence takes. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Saying Tawian ROC is an island country in the first sentence would sound too much like Wikipedia itself supports a certain interpretation of Taiwan's status or even independence from parts of the pan-green camp, specifically the theory that "Republic of China is Taiwan", at the expense of other viewpoints on the matter. CurryCity (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've said this before. Taiwan is generally used to stand in for ROC on Wikipedia. French overseas territory is not an analogy for "mainland territory" of Taiwan, the history and geography are completely different. CurryCity (talk) 18:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- When we state Taiwan is an island country, we're not saying anything about the ROC's territory either. Saying France is a European country doesn't say anything about the French Republic's territory in South America or the Pacific. Remsense诉 17:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- The revision history began with the Republic of China if I'm not mistaken. Was there a merge or move? Vacosea (talk) 12:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Very early on, because it's obviously the WP:COMMONNAME of the country. Remsense诉 12:39, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Do you happen to know which discussion to search for? Vacosea (talk) 13:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Everything since 2010 is in the banners above. There was a reorganization in 2003, but I don't know if anyone has mapped out that history. CMD (talk) 22:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Do you happen to know which discussion to search for? Vacosea (talk) 13:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- The idea that since the article history traces back to the Republic of China, it (currently named Taiwan) can only be about a narrow definition of what it was formerly named would be a false premise. The modern polity of the ROC is commonly known as Taiwan, and Taiwan has a history that predates the ROC. This article is about Taiwan. Butterdiplomat (talk) 13:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not saying Taiwan isn't a country or island. I'm saying Wikipedia should not say or equate ROC is an island country because its exact territory is still in dispute with competing theories, and Wikipedia should not favor one by saying ROC already is (blank). That's why so many sources say ROC controls Taiwan. CurryCity (talk) 08:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- You are conflating the usage, though. In “the ROC controls Taiwan,” the ROC refers to the state, and Taiwan refers to the island. In a historical context, this is relevant because the ROC didn’t always control the island. But in any other usage where it is “Taiwan, officially named the ROC,” Taiwan refers to the country currently named the ROC officially.
- Taiwan is a country (per 2020 RfC and subsequent discussions), and it is made of islands. That the ROC state’s territory is disputed is noted already in the article, but the factual situation has not really changed in 60+ years, and definitely not since RS started consistently using Taiwan as a stand-in for the ROC. Butterdiplomat (talk) 09:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- My main point is not addressed. We can't say what kind of country the ROC is even if Formosa and other nearby or far-off islands arguably form an island country under the common name "Taiwan". The United States and several other major countries have never recognised that ROC has sovereignty over the territory of "Taiwan". The PRC and its allies do not recognise the ROC at all, state or country, and consider the territory of "Taiwan" as part of "China". People in the pan-blue camp may recognise territory beyond "Taiwan" but under ROC not PRC. While independence supporters, whose numbers are still significant, believe the ROC is a government in exile without a territory. There is no consensus in terms of kind of country the ROC is (other than what it controls, which as I've pointed out is already accurately described). Wikipedia shouldn't make something new up. The 2020 RfC never addressed this as far as I can tell. CurryCity (talk) 09:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Again, the ROC is not the country (otherwise, your argument would extend to dispute the usage of “country” as well); it is a state that is (similar to other country articles) conflated with the country Taiwan due to the overlap in the modern context. The different interpretations and political positions about ROC’s territories are mentioned in the article and discussed in Political status of Taiwan. This article is about the country of Taiwan, which in the modern context, overlaps with the territories controlled by the state ROC. How the UN, US, political parties, and PRC interpret the ROC’s territories (political) is not relevant to what kind of country Taiwan is (factual). Butterdiplomat (talk) 10:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- On a historical level just about everything you just said is wrong. I think maybe you're confused or misinformed and so what you have to say isn't meshing with what other people are saying here. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Your reasoning about Taiwan does not equate with ROC. What ROC fully means is in dispute. Wikipedia should not have an unsupported statement implying anything about ROC territory in the first sentence. It is disputed by the US, PRC, other countries, and members of Taiwan's own blue and green camps. Even Taiwan's own web site only refers to control, "The ROC government began exercising jurisdiction over Taiwan". Straight from the horse's mouth. CurryCity (talk) 07:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- There are different meanings to "Taiwan", and I think some of the above was also more definitive about vague words like "country" and "state" than we can be at this level. The use of "Taiwan" on this page refers to the polity of the Republic of China, although the page of course covers the island of Taiwan, the history of the area, and other relevant context as all polity pages do. There are other semantic and philosophical positions on various terms, but the use on this article is determined by the wording used by English-language sources to refer to the article topic. CMD (talk) 07:15, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- That does not seem to be the definition many people are going with here in this discussion. Qiushufang (talk) 00:58, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure what definitions people are trying to use, maybe they could provide it, but that is the definition used to title this article following the 2012 RM. CMD (talk) 01:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- That does not seem to be the definition many people are going with here in this discussion. Qiushufang (talk) 00:58, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- My main point is not addressed: How the UN, US, political parties, and PRC interpret the ROC’s territories (political) is not relevant to what kind of country Taiwan is (factual). Butterdiplomat (talk) 10:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- This might help clarify the scope of the article. Instead of "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China", open with "Taiwan, a jurisdiction under the Republic of China". Other editorial decisions would then fall into place naturally. Vacosea (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t think that is quite consistent with the existing consensus. The fact is that Taiwan is the country, currently and officially known as the Republic of China. That is how English-language sources have referenced Taiwan and what common usage has been. Your phrasing makes Taiwan a separate entity and your description of this Taiwan is not a country, but a geographic area currently covered by Geography of Taiwan.
- Just because a few people are irritated by the usage of “Taiwan” in any capacity relating to a state or country (despite RS doing so) does not mean we need to only relegate “Taiwan” to an island. Butterdiplomat (talk) 23:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, what I'm actually suggesting is something like "Taiwan, an official jurisdiction (definition 3) of the Republic of China, is an island country in East Asia". The opening right now sounds as if the article is about the Republic of China. Correctly describing the relationship makes what follows naturally refer to Taiwan only, the currently active jurisdiction and country. Again I'm not proposing any changes to the article's name or the word country. Vacosea (talk) 05:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The article is about the Republic of China. CMD (talk) 05:50, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Not true according to Etymology and History sections. It's about Taiwan only and the Republic of China only if overlapping with Taiwan. Vacosea (talk) 05:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure what definition of Taiwan you are using, but its use on this article refers to the Republic of China unless contextually disambiguated. CMD (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Not true according to Etymology and History sections. It's about Taiwan only and the Republic of China only if overlapping with Taiwan. Vacosea (talk) 05:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The article is about the country of Taiwan, which overlaps with the Republic of China in the modern context in common usage. The Etymology section explains the word Taiwan’s other meanings. It is similar to China in that way. It would not make sense to say “China, an official jurisdiction of the People’s Republic of China, is a country in East Asia” - even though you could say this makes sense if the words are defined a certain way. Butterdiplomat (talk) 11:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The article is about the Republic of China. CMD (talk) 05:50, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, what I'm actually suggesting is something like "Taiwan, an official jurisdiction (definition 3) of the Republic of China, is an island country in East Asia". The opening right now sounds as if the article is about the Republic of China. Correctly describing the relationship makes what follows naturally refer to Taiwan only, the currently active jurisdiction and country. Again I'm not proposing any changes to the article's name or the word country. Vacosea (talk) 05:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- There are different meanings to "Taiwan", and I think some of the above was also more definitive about vague words like "country" and "state" than we can be at this level. The use of "Taiwan" on this page refers to the polity of the Republic of China, although the page of course covers the island of Taiwan, the history of the area, and other relevant context as all polity pages do. There are other semantic and philosophical positions on various terms, but the use on this article is determined by the wording used by English-language sources to refer to the article topic. CMD (talk) 07:15, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Your reasoning about Taiwan does not equate with ROC. What ROC fully means is in dispute. Wikipedia should not have an unsupported statement implying anything about ROC territory in the first sentence. It is disputed by the US, PRC, other countries, and members of Taiwan's own blue and green camps. Even Taiwan's own web site only refers to control, "The ROC government began exercising jurisdiction over Taiwan". Straight from the horse's mouth. CurryCity (talk) 07:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- My main point is not addressed. We can't say what kind of country the ROC is even if Formosa and other nearby or far-off islands arguably form an island country under the common name "Taiwan". The United States and several other major countries have never recognised that ROC has sovereignty over the territory of "Taiwan". The PRC and its allies do not recognise the ROC at all, state or country, and consider the territory of "Taiwan" as part of "China". People in the pan-blue camp may recognise territory beyond "Taiwan" but under ROC not PRC. While independence supporters, whose numbers are still significant, believe the ROC is a government in exile without a territory. There is no consensus in terms of kind of country the ROC is (other than what it controls, which as I've pointed out is already accurately described). Wikipedia shouldn't make something new up. The 2020 RfC never addressed this as far as I can tell. CurryCity (talk) 09:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not saying Taiwan isn't a country or island. I'm saying Wikipedia should not say or equate ROC is an island country because its exact territory is still in dispute with competing theories, and Wikipedia should not favor one by saying ROC already is (blank). That's why so many sources say ROC controls Taiwan. CurryCity (talk) 08:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Very early on, because it's obviously the WP:COMMONNAME of the country. Remsense诉 12:39, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- What the different terms mean are not as clear as they can be. It's been said that this is about ROC, not about ROC, about Taiwan, about the intersection of Taiwan and ROC. The first sentence should be more accurate and neutral than the article's title. COMMONNAME does not need to override other concerns everywhere. CurryCity (talk) 17:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- What exactly are the “other concerns”? We apply COMMONNAME where appropriate, but the article is about the country Taiwan in any case. Like other country articles, there is a conflation of country and current state. For example, China is both about the People’s Republic of China and the history that predates the PRC; Greece is both about the Hellenic Republic and the history prior. Laos is about the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, and so on.
- There is no RS that dispute Taiwan as an island country, and as far as I can tell, any political position that challenges Taiwan/ROC as an island country also challenges it as a country in the first place - which is a FRINGE stance that is irrelevant for this discussion. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- COMMONNAME is about article titles not everything else. You're saying because Taiwan is an island country, and it is the "common name" according to some Wikipedia editors, therefore ROC is also an island country, but I don't think that's supported. It sounds like WP:OR and conflating the idea of name with the idea of equivalence. Furthermore, the nature of ROC arguably even Taiwan is not a settled fact where the language of supporting RS can override everything else. It is an ongoing debate in reality, and Wikipedia should describe the different views neutrally without promoting solely one in wikivoice, especially since "ROC is Taiwan" is a DPP-centric political theory. Here is what the United States said in 2008, not a fringe stance on some settled fact but a legitimate point of view in an ongoing debate:
Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community. The position of the United States government is that the ROC -- Republic of China -- is an issue undecided, and it has been left undecided, as you know, for many, many years.
CurryCity (talk) 10:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)- It is not a political theory, it's a simple observance of the English language. Taiwan, or the Republic of China, as they say. That is why the article on the ROC is titled Taiwan. The place for detailed semantic and political critiques is probably not this high-level article, but it may fit elsewhere. CMD (talk) 11:44, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- The theory literally includes "ROC is Taiwan", while other theories disagree. None has been established as a fact, so it should not be stated in wikivoice. "Observance" of the English language is not as important in comparison. CurryCity (talk) 13:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Observing use of the English language is vitally important to the writing here, as it relates to the meaning of the language the readers use. This particular English meaning is a well-known fact, as per the source you cited. CMD (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- The theory of “ROC is Taiwan” is not the reason this article is outlined the way it is. English language usage is. Taiwan is a country (with its various cultural and historical aspects predating whatever modern state it is conflated with) that is officially known as the Republic of China. This formulation is consistent even with the quote you yourself provided. I’d like to stress that the proposal is a simple and helpful addition of “island” to the existing “country” description that is already reflective of the consensus, so the usage of “country” is not being relitigated in this specific discussion. Butterdiplomat (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- The theory literally includes "ROC is Taiwan", while other theories disagree. None has been established as a fact, so it should not be stated in wikivoice. "Observance" of the English language is not as important in comparison. CurryCity (talk) 13:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Please explain what you mean by name vs. equivalence, because it is not clear what the concerns are. Different names can refer to the same thing (Taiwan and ROC referring to the same country), and one name can refer to several things (Taiwan referring to country or island), but it is very clear in this article. The only thing being conflated, as typical of country articles, is the country and modern state.
- COMMONNAME is applied to the title and as appropriate throughout the article - please explain where you think it is being misused. We don’t say North Korea (vs. DPRK) in the title and then nowhere else in the article; or Greece (vs. Hellenic Republic).
- We are not “promoting” a partisan view but reflecting common usage in the English language. It is not our responsibility to avoid describing facts simply because they align with a particular partisan theory. In that same vein, your 2008 quote is irrelevant because political positions like that were fully discussed in the 2020 RfC. If anything, it demonstrates the point that different names can refer to the same thing. Butterdiplomat (talk) 11:46, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- It has not been factually settled whether ROC is Taiwan or an island country. The US and a few other countries do not even recognise that the territory of Taiwan belongs to ROC. It is an actual debate in international politics, not just how language is used on Wikipedia. The first sentence should not promote one view in wikivoice while burying others. Some of your arguments basically boil down to this or that is "irrelevant". CurryCity (talk) 13:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Per above, the “ROC is Taiwan” theory is not the reason we state “Taiwan, officially the Republic of China, is a country …” in the lede. Common usage in English is. “Island country”, like “country”, would not be saying what belongs to the ROC, presumably meaning what diplomatically or politically is recognized. Butterdiplomat (talk) 13:34, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- It would because you would be equating ROC with island country and changing the meaning for ROC. This is not just about language on Wikipedia. In reality, different views on ROC exist. Besides the US which considers the ROC issue undecided, Germany considers
Taiwan is a part of China
.[4] Adding island in wikivoice would make the first sentence deviate even more from the actual ROC debate. CurryCity (talk) 05:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- Please note that what the U.S. considers undecided is the issue of Taiwan, not the issue of the ROC. Matt Smith (talk) 06:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- We are not changing the meaning of the ROC. We are describing the island country Taiwan (officially named ROC) as it is and as the English language describes it. Views on ROC territories can either be factual or political, and it should not be an issue prioritizing the factual over any political views that contradict the factual.
- You keep bringing up political views of Taiwan not being a country or being part of China, and you aren’t really explaining their relevance to this discussion. To be clear, are you agreeing it is factually an island country, but preferring to not reference this in the first sentence only (due to various and inconsistent political views)? Butterdiplomat (talk) 10:16, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- If ROC territory is unsettled, it cannot be said or equated to an island country in wikivoice. The US and others view Taiwan (island) as not anyone's official territory and is undetermined intentionally. Germany, PRC, KMT and their supporters say it's part of the country China. Some DPP members think it's Taiwan only but that's not the only view either. CurryCity (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not the US position. That hasn't been the KMT position since the 1980s or earlier and the German position is more nuanced than that. See WP:FRINGE Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Calling important countries and party fringe is not going to win you any points. US 2008
The position of the United States government is that the ROC -- Republic of China -- is an issue undecided, and it has been left undecided, as you know, for many, many years.
The ROC (Taiwan) to date does not consider itself to be a separate independent State. Germany 2019 Like the PRC, it takes the position that there is only one “China” of which both Taiwan and the mainland are a part.
KMT 2020Taiwan’s main opposition party, the Kuomintang, has decided to keep the 1992 consensus on “one China” as part of its cross-strait policy
CurryCity (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- You don't appear to understand what you're talking about, the 1992 consensus as a policy position is not a claim to the territory of the PRC. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you explain what it means then if you know what you're talking about? CurryCity (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- That isn't the purpose of this talk page or this specific discussion, if you would like to learn more about the 1992 consensus I suggest the linked article as a place to start. If you want to learn more about German-Taiwan relations I suggest Germany–Taiwan relations as a starting point. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have provided reliable sources to oppose the change to the first sentence in wikivoice. Is your evasiveness because you might actually be wrong?
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has rejected the formula, saying it implies that Taiwan is a part of China
[5] CurryCity (talk) 17:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- As far as I can tell you did not do that, what I see is an argument so confusing and multi-threaded that here in the end it has convinced no-one and tied up its author. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not responsible for the multi-threaded digression that you have been on lately. CurryCity (talk) 18:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- You have not. Your sources at best dispute the political / diplomatic popularity of interpreting Taiwan (island)’s status. And you’re having to shift definitions to make the point you’re trying to make. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I advise both of you to speak truthfully about the discussion. My first comment was literally consistent with my position now:
Saying Taiwan ROC is an island country is different from saying ROC controls the island. Making them equivalent sounds too much like a political position about its territory. I don't think the first sentence of this article should implicitly promote one
and I have provided sources from US, Germany, and KMT with different non-fringe views on ROC territory to object to the proposed change to this article's first sentence in wikivoice. CurryCity (talk) 18:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- This article is about Taiwan (country), which is factually an island country. I think you are hung up on the “officially the Republic of China” part of the sentence and also are interpreting it as saying Taiwan (island) is equivalent to the ROC; we are not saying this.
- If it helps, you can think of it as saying Taiwan (country) is currently officially the Republic of China. Prior to the arrival of the ROC government, the country had a multitude of rulers that predate the ROC. This formulation is consistent with China (officially the People’s Republic of China) and Greece (officially the Hellenic Republic), and virtually all country articles.
- That the U.S., Germany, and various political parties have views on ROC territories does not change the fact that Taiwan (country) is made up of Taiwan (island) and other islands, i.e., an island country. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- By your definition(s), territory still matters if Taiwan (country) is ROC, which cannot be said to be an island country in wikivoice. I supported ROC "control" of islands. You mentioned the China (PRC) article, which also does not imply territory in the first sentence. What China is with or without Taiwan is unstated. CurryCity (talk) 19:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan (country) very obviously cannot be the ROC at all times and into eternity (your “ROC is Taiwan” objection appears to hold this strawman). We have a separate article for the state prior to its arrival to Taiwan, and we do not opine on where we think it goes in the future. But, currently and notably conflated by RS, Taiwan and the ROC are names for the same island country. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- By your definition(s), territory still matters if Taiwan (country) is ROC, which cannot be said to be an island country in wikivoice. I supported ROC "control" of islands. You mentioned the China (PRC) article, which also does not imply territory in the first sentence. What China is with or without Taiwan is unstated. CurryCity (talk) 19:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I advise both of you to speak truthfully about the discussion. My first comment was literally consistent with my position now:
- As far as I can tell you did not do that, what I see is an argument so confusing and multi-threaded that here in the end it has convinced no-one and tied up its author. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have provided reliable sources to oppose the change to the first sentence in wikivoice. Is your evasiveness because you might actually be wrong?
- That isn't the purpose of this talk page or this specific discussion, if you would like to learn more about the 1992 consensus I suggest the linked article as a place to start. If you want to learn more about German-Taiwan relations I suggest Germany–Taiwan relations as a starting point. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why don't you explain what it means then if you know what you're talking about? CurryCity (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- You don't appear to understand what you're talking about, the 1992 consensus as a policy position is not a claim to the territory of the PRC. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Calling important countries and party fringe is not going to win you any points. US 2008
- That is not the US position. That hasn't been the KMT position since the 1980s or earlier and the German position is more nuanced than that. See WP:FRINGE Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- If ROC territory is unsettled, it cannot be said or equated to an island country in wikivoice. The US and others view Taiwan (island) as not anyone's official territory and is undetermined intentionally. Germany, PRC, KMT and their supporters say it's part of the country China. Some DPP members think it's Taiwan only but that's not the only view either. CurryCity (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- It would because you would be equating ROC with island country and changing the meaning for ROC. This is not just about language on Wikipedia. In reality, different views on ROC exist. Besides the US which considers the ROC issue undecided, Germany considers
- Slightly differentiating the Republic of China from Taiwan can avoid problems like this, because you can all be correct depending on the usage. For example "air" is a synonym for the atmosphere of Earth, but they are not technically the same thing [6]. Vacosea (talk) 22:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- We actually do differentiate the terms in the Etymology section, quite extensively. But for the purpose of this country article and for practical, factual reasons, the article conforms to other country articles and English language usage. Adding “island” to country does not change that. Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Per above, the “ROC is Taiwan” theory is not the reason we state “Taiwan, officially the Republic of China, is a country …” in the lede. Common usage in English is. “Island country”, like “country”, would not be saying what belongs to the ROC, presumably meaning what diplomatically or politically is recognized. Butterdiplomat (talk) 13:34, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- It has not been factually settled whether ROC is Taiwan or an island country. The US and a few other countries do not even recognise that the territory of Taiwan belongs to ROC. It is an actual debate in international politics, not just how language is used on Wikipedia. The first sentence should not promote one view in wikivoice while burying others. Some of your arguments basically boil down to this or that is "irrelevant". CurryCity (talk) 13:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is not a political theory, it's a simple observance of the English language. Taiwan, or the Republic of China, as they say. That is why the article on the ROC is titled Taiwan. The place for detailed semantic and political critiques is probably not this high-level article, but it may fit elsewhere. CMD (talk) 11:44, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- COMMONNAME is about article titles not everything else. You're saying because Taiwan is an island country, and it is the "common name" according to some Wikipedia editors, therefore ROC is also an island country, but I don't think that's supported. It sounds like WP:OR and conflating the idea of name with the idea of equivalence. Furthermore, the nature of ROC arguably even Taiwan is not a settled fact where the language of supporting RS can override everything else. It is an ongoing debate in reality, and Wikipedia should describe the different views neutrally without promoting solely one in wikivoice, especially since "ROC is Taiwan" is a DPP-centric political theory. Here is what the United States said in 2008, not a fringe stance on some settled fact but a legitimate point of view in an ongoing debate:
Straw poll
[edit]In an effort to move the discussion along and suss out more viewpoints and arguments, I would like to start a straw poll and welcome everyone’s opinion, comment, or questions. For the avoidance of doubt, the proposal here is to revise the first sentence to Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC), is an island country in East Asia
. That is, we are merely adding “island” before the existing “country” language.
- Feel free to state your position on the proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''
or*'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with~~~~
. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account any relevant Wikipedia conventions or guidelines, as well as the 2020 RfC. - Comment I don't think "merely adding" is a neutral way of phrasing this Rfc. CurryCity (talk) 12:20, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Survey
[edit]- Support' even mainland China academics use this type of terminology... Gao, A.M.Z. (2023). Environmental Law in Taiwan. Wolters Kluwer. p. 19. ISBN 978-94-035-2926-4. Retrieved 2024-07-05..Moxy🍁 17:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the first paragraph of that section is copied from the Wikipedia Geography of Taiwan article (circa late 2022). Kanguole 17:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Leaving alone the possibility that a generic statement could just be self-evident enough that it did not warrant any citation, it would be near impossible to say this was copied from Wikipedia. Even if we assume that, couldn’t it be equally meaningful as a confirmation of accepted terminology? The point was that this formulation was used in an academic paper. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The first paragraph is identical to the first paragraph of this version. Plagiarism indicates lack of scrutiny, not meaningful confirmation. Kanguole 18:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I take your point. Was thinking it was just the first, relative generic sentence. I stand corrected. Tossing out that particular example, there are certainly no shortage of other sources. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dame looks like we've got some plagiarism on our page..... the section in the book was first published in 2016. Moxy🍁 18:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- They make only passing mentions. The first one does not appear to be in the book's voice but looks like a quote of someone else. Another one that's self-published from Gilad James Mystery School,
a collection of dozens of online courses in mysterious topics such as Occultism, Witchcraft, Kabbalah, and other esoteric and hidden knowledge.
[7] Do they specifically intend to mean ROC is an island country according to the usage Taiwan is ROC? CurryCity (talk) 12:20, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I take your point. Was thinking it was just the first, relative generic sentence. I stand corrected. Tossing out that particular example, there are certainly no shortage of other sources. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The first paragraph is identical to the first paragraph of this version. Plagiarism indicates lack of scrutiny, not meaningful confirmation. Kanguole 18:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Leaving alone the possibility that a generic statement could just be self-evident enough that it did not warrant any citation, it would be near impossible to say this was copied from Wikipedia. Even if we assume that, couldn’t it be equally meaningful as a confirmation of accepted terminology? The point was that this formulation was used in an academic paper. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why does everyone seems to think Gao is from mainland China? He's a professor at National Tsing Hua University in Hsinchu. CurryCity (talk) 11:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the first paragraph of that section is copied from the Wikipedia Geography of Taiwan article (circa late 2022). Kanguole 17:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Status quo I'm concerned the article's first sentence is straying more and more into a narrow view point. Many generally reliable sources that mention "island", consistently do not use or combine it with "country": NYT ([8][9]) The Guardian ([10][11]) NPR ([12][13]). The reason is self-evident. There are legitimate debates going on among scholars and political bodies regarding the actual status of Taiwan, ROC, and its territory, ranging from it's part of China[14] to it is "China plus Taiwan"[15][16] to it's merely in control[17] of Taiwan or undecided[18]. Saying Taiwan is a country already bypasses important arguments to the contrary. Equating ROC with "island country" has even less support among the tens of thousands of sources that describe Taiwan. It doesn't make sense trying to pass it off like other island countries that do not face fundamental sovereignty issues. That's simply not the case for Taiwan in reality. CurryCity (talk) 12:20, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the addition here. Your argument here is almost exactly why I think the added context of island country is needed to qualify what the article is about. It is not about the ROC only or equating the ROC with Taiwan at all times, as in it does not treat Taiwan as an atemporal entity. It is about Taiwan (country), which encompasses Taiwan (island) and other islands geographically and is conflated with the ROC (state) temporally, but only in the modern context.
- Given this, to address the sources/points you provide:
- NYT, The Guardian, NPR not mentioning country — This has to do with Political status of Taiwan and not our discussion here
- Sources saying Taiwan is part of China — Depending on the context they are either wrong and fringe (i.e., if they say Taiwan is part of PRC or ROC is part of PRC), clearly political/policy statements (i.e., not a matter of fact), or they are cultural assertions of Taiwan (country or island) being part of China (country) that still do not contradict the proposal
- Sources saying the ROC is undecided or in control of Taiwan — Again, these are policy statements and also not contradictory to the proposal. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Island country" is a statement about territory and political status. CurryCity (talk) 11:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not any more than "country" is, and the status quo of stating Taiwan as a country is already supported by consensus. The addition of "island" in the first sentence only makes it a narrow viewpoint insofar as it makes it an accurate viewpoint. Is the argument that we are to make the first sentence intentionally ambiguous? In that case, for what reason and in whose favor? The viewpoints that Taiwan is not a country or state or nation may be plenty depending on how one defines each term (though a determination was made via the 2020 RfC), but the viewpoint that it is not an island or group of islands is just contrary to any common, academic, or legal references to Taiwan.
- I think you are trying to make the argument that restricting ROC territories to a group of islands only is a political viewpoint, and I understand the point that the ROC has indeed shifted territories dramatically and its political status remains "unresolved". However, this article is about the country known as Taiwan (not least given the article title), which is indeed an island country with several editors effectively noting the proposed language as redundant. Throughout its history and currently (as the ROC officially) and regardless of the state / whether was considered a country, Taiwan has been either an island or made up of islands. Butterdiplomat (talk) 07:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- The first sentence is also about ROC, whose territory is debated politically. I have said control works better in terms of describing the island nature of Taiwan. CurryCity (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Like the rest of the article, the first sentence is only about the ROC in the modern context and as Taiwan's current and official name. Any usage of Taiwan, including in the modern period where it is conflated with the ROC state, refers to either an island or group of islands. Butterdiplomat (talk) 00:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- The first sentence is also about ROC, whose territory is debated politically. I have said control works better in terms of describing the island nature of Taiwan. CurryCity (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support' its a country on an island. Slatersteven (talk) 12:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as not needed here, and complicates the first sentence. Australia does not use analogous terms. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- That particular example is likely as it generates semantic arguments about the definition of "island" and "continent". Checking a few nearby countries, many use "island" but Indonesia does not. CMD (talk) 13:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just for completeness, I'd just point out the following articles use "island country": Japan, Vanuatu, Tuvalu, Tonga, Sri Lanka, Saint Lucia, Samoa. This is a common and helpful reference and does not have to be thought of as complicating the sentence in these instances. Butterdiplomat (talk) 23:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The lead already says that the country is made up of a main island and several smaller ones. TFD (talk) 15:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just to confirm, you would oppose rather than be neutral because of redundancy? Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support as island country is an accurate description. - Amigao (talk) 02:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose To an article about the ROC, "island country" can be considered assertive and debatable. --Matt Smith (talk) 10:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- For the avoidance of doubt, this article is about Taiwan (country) and is only about the ROC insofar as the two are conflated in modern usage. Could you articulate what your concerns are of adding an island descriptor to the already existing country? Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not exactly correct, this article is about the current polity which is sometimes called Taiwan, sometimes called the Republic of China. Conflation would require other definitions of both terms, which do exist but are not the topic of this article. CMD (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify, I just mean the conflation of state and country. The modern state (ROC) is often conflated with the country (Taiwan), just as the PRC is conflated with China, the Hellenic Republic with Greece, etc. This article includes the polity, but it is also about the history, culture, economy, demographics of the country. Much like other country articles. Butterdiplomat (talk) 02:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I see what you mean, the challenge is that "state" and "country" are usually interchangeable outside of academic circles, and sometimes even in those circles. Much like other country articles as you say, the sources do not distinguish between the Hellenic Republic and Greece, so at this high-level of article neither should we. If we are getting into the weeds of defining what a country is separate to that of being a state, that is an indication the discussion is likely undue for the article. I raise mostly as the distinction does not seem to bring clarity to discussions here due to the common use of the terms as synonyms, see for example how the debate here seems to have shifted to "country" despite the initial discussion being about "island". Best, CMD (talk) 03:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I fully appreciate that, but I think this discussion is actually not about whether Taiwan is a country or a state (that debate was settled at least for now in the 2020 RfC and other discussions). We are debating what kind of country Taiwan is. Which would be a helpful clarification in the first sentence, in my opinion. I’d argue the fact that this seems contentious illustrates its helpfulness. Butterdiplomat (talk) 05:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I see what you mean, the challenge is that "state" and "country" are usually interchangeable outside of academic circles, and sometimes even in those circles. Much like other country articles as you say, the sources do not distinguish between the Hellenic Republic and Greece, so at this high-level of article neither should we. If we are getting into the weeds of defining what a country is separate to that of being a state, that is an indication the discussion is likely undue for the article. I raise mostly as the distinction does not seem to bring clarity to discussions here due to the common use of the terms as synonyms, see for example how the debate here seems to have shifted to "country" despite the initial discussion being about "island". Best, CMD (talk) 03:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify, I just mean the conflation of state and country. The modern state (ROC) is often conflated with the country (Taiwan), just as the PRC is conflated with China, the Hellenic Republic with Greece, etc. This article includes the polity, but it is also about the history, culture, economy, demographics of the country. Much like other country articles. Butterdiplomat (talk) 02:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- According to the first sentence of the lede, this article is about the ROC. If WP:COMMONNAME were not strictly applied, the article title would have been "Republic of China" and the first sentence of the lede would have been "The Republic of China, commonly referred to as Taiwan." Matt Smith (talk) 03:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, according to the first sentence, this article is about Taiwan. The country of Taiwan is currently under the control of the Republic of China, so it is officially called that. The ROC government could be replaced by a completely new government and this article would remain about Taiwan. There is no single ROC article covering the entirety of its history in detail. The ROC is covered in the article China (and in more detail in the article Republic of China (1912-1949)) for its history until 1949 and in this article for its history since then. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- The island of Taiwan is under the control of the Republic of China, the "country" of Taiwan is the Republic of China, whichever name or government they may or may not change to. There is an article about the history of the ROC in detail at History of the Republic of China. CMD (talk) 12:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nope. Or are you claiming that the ROC existed 20000 years ago? This ia a country article about Taiwan. It covers the time before the ROC and the time under the ROC. Just as any country article covers the time before the existence of its current state. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- However we understand the scope of the article, I think we all agree it is about the country and that this country is an island country. The nature of its official name or political status does not contradict that. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am not following this response. Countries and states are the same sorts of entities. There was no country of Taiwan 20000 years ago. CMD (talk) 01:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think we are simply getting deep into very abstract and philosophical territories with this discussion. By my reading, Khajidha is distinguishing country (Taiwan) and the modern state (ROC) and saying that the history of the country goes back before the establishment/arrival of the state — the country is a broader concept. What you are saying is that the state defines the country, and in this article it is the country. But in both instances, the country is an island country, I guess would be my takeaway and how I would close the loop. Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- A country is a chunk of ground. A state is a government. The chunk of ground that we call Taiwan certainly was around 20000 years ago and the things that happened on it are covered in this article. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nope. Or are you claiming that the ROC existed 20000 years ago? This ia a country article about Taiwan. It covers the time before the ROC and the time under the ROC. Just as any country article covers the time before the existence of its current state. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- The island of Taiwan is under the control of the Republic of China, the "country" of Taiwan is the Republic of China, whichever name or government they may or may not change to. There is an article about the history of the ROC in detail at History of the Republic of China. CMD (talk) 12:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, according to the first sentence, this article is about Taiwan. The country of Taiwan is currently under the control of the Republic of China, so it is officially called that. The ROC government could be replaced by a completely new government and this article would remain about Taiwan. There is no single ROC article covering the entirety of its history in detail. The ROC is covered in the article China (and in more detail in the article Republic of China (1912-1949)) for its history until 1949 and in this article for its history since then. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- After looking through past discussions, I think what Matt Smith said is the correct understanding. This article began as "Republic of China" and was moved because "Taiwan" became a common name for the topic, which is still the Republic of China, but with a focus on its current jurisdiction. Vacosea (talk) 05:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is the move history, I concur. But the article has clearly evolved over time to incorporate other aspects of the country, which makes sense. Republic of China (1911-1949) was non-existent at one point, and now it houses most of the early ROC history. Usage in the English language evolves over time as well, and at this moment in time (and for many decades already), Taiwan and Republic of China both refer to the same island country. Butterdiplomat (talk) 07:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not exactly correct, this article is about the current polity which is sometimes called Taiwan, sometimes called the Republic of China. Conflation would require other definitions of both terms, which do exist but are not the topic of this article. CMD (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- For the avoidance of doubt, this article is about Taiwan (country) and is only about the ROC insofar as the two are conflated in modern usage. Could you articulate what your concerns are of adding an island descriptor to the already existing country? Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This article is always fraying on the edge. The lead has been stable now for longer than any other time and pulling on a tiny loose thread just invites more problems down the road. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Responding to this comment given presumably it is about the island country proposal: As far as I can tell, there was only 1 prior proposal of adding an “island” descriptor to “country” following the 2020 RfC (determining “country” as the term to use), and the arguments were not exhaustive. This time around, the new “arguments” for this addition are:
- It is a stylistic change that is consistent with the 2020 RfC;
- Many, if not most, other island countries have this phrasing in the first sentence; and
- It distinguishes Taiwan from Thailand upfront.
- There certainly are more supports than before. Perhaps half of the opposes so far view the addition as redundant, not inaccurate; this is addressed by argument #2 above. The remainder of opposes seem to misunderstand or disagree on what this article is about. This article is about the country Taiwan, i.e. more than just the state ROC (politics), it is about the land. And this particular land is characterized by islands, just like other island countries. Butterdiplomat (talk) 11:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Responding to this comment given presumably it is about the island country proposal: As far as I can tell, there was only 1 prior proposal of adding an “island” descriptor to “country” following the 2020 RfC (determining “country” as the term to use), and the arguments were not exhaustive. This time around, the new “arguments” for this addition are:
- Oppose Taiwan is arguably a country and calls itself one, but the Republic of China (Taiwan) does not formally identify as an independent island country separate from China. Officially, it still claims to be the legitimate government of all China. This is reflected in Taiwan's constitution and official stance, which does not support separatism or relinquish its legal claim over the mainland.[19] Therefore, presenting the ROC as independent from China disregards its official stance and legal framework. I would support this if Taiwan's constitution endorsed separatism or relinquished its claim over the mainland, but it does not. Wikipedia should not contradict their official position. NewYearGOT (talk) 09:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia already does contradict the official position described here, as it does for many official positions for many countries around the world. CMD (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- If you call it as an island nation, you are basically saying it has approved separatism and relinquished their claims to the mainland. But that's not their situation. For other countries, there's no issues in calling it an island. But for Taiwan, you can't be treating it like the others when it has obvious political issues as calling it an island nation basically means officially separatist and independent from China. If you describe Taiwan this way, you must clarify soon afterwards that it is not officially independent from China and still claims all of China, otherwise you mislead people into thinking its official status has suddenly changed. NewYearGOT (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- We're describing the situation as it is. Remsense诉 20:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Describing Taiwan as an independent island country on Wikipedia is misleading and lacks official backing. The ROC identifies itself as the legitimate government of all China, and no country, including the ROC, officially recognizes Taiwan as a separate, independent island state. Ignoring this official reality invites dispute as it contradicts the legal and political stance of the ROC and other nations. NewYearGOT (talk) 20:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- The proposal is “island country”, not “island country independent from China”. So, the proposed language in fact does not contradict those official stances. In any case, we describe facts as is or as observed, and Wikipedia is not a log of official government stances. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Referring to Taiwan as an island nation inherently implies it is independent from China. It is contradictory to call it an island nation while also asserting it is not independent from China. This inconsistency must be avoided for clarity and accuracy. See my below reply. NewYearGOT (talk) 21:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is your opinion and not supported by RS. You may as well say that “omitting ‘island country’ implies it is part of China”. We are not stating its status in relation to China by adding this qualifier. Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- There are no reliable sources that describe Taiwan as an island nation because the ROC does not legally or officially identify itself as such. Instead, it identifies as the government of all China, which is largely connected to the Eurasian continent. Referring to Taiwan in the first sentence on Wikipedia as an island nation without immediate clarification misrepresents its current stance and oversimplifies the complexity of its legal and political statusNewYearGOT (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- We are not meant to describe the ROC stance vs. the situation as is and as observed by the rest of the world. Butterdiplomat (talk) 08:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- We are not meant to disregard official gov stances on defining an entity. I understand that because Wikipedia is a crowdsourced platform, it can sometimes oversimplify or misrepresent nuanced situations. But such things should be avoided. We don't ever say Crimea is Russian and no longer Ukrainian despite no Ukraine effective control because of official international consensus and we don't ignore it. Similarly doesn't matter if Taiwan is controlled by China or not. That doesn't suddenly end China's sovereignty over it, in which majority of the world still recognize.[20] And that's the whole problem here. You guys are just rushing to oversimplify a situation that can be seen as taking sides.
- But wikipedia should accurately reflect the self-identification of political entities and the broader international consensus to avoid diminishing any claims or misrepresenting the situation. Balancing these perspectives is challenging but it is essential for ensuring that the information remains neutral, accurate, and respectful of all viewpoints involved.NewYearGOT (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is not an active war, and a more apt comparison would be North Korea and South Korea. We would not say Taiwan is part of China just as we would not say South Korea is part of North Korea (or vice versa). The overwhelming consensus, which matches English language usage, is that North Korea and the DPRK refer to the same thing; similar to South Korea and the ROK, China and the PRC, and lastly Taiwan and the ROC. The latter is an island country, and you are not making a clear argument against this statement besides personal or governmental politics. Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- We are not meant to describe the ROC stance vs. the situation as is and as observed by the rest of the world. Butterdiplomat (talk) 08:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- There are no reliable sources that describe Taiwan as an island nation because the ROC does not legally or officially identify itself as such. Instead, it identifies as the government of all China, which is largely connected to the Eurasian continent. Referring to Taiwan in the first sentence on Wikipedia as an island nation without immediate clarification misrepresents its current stance and oversimplifies the complexity of its legal and political statusNewYearGOT (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well, it factually IS independent of China. Last I checked Beijing could not pass laws for Taiwan and expect them to be followed. They may not like it, they may rant and rave and whine and intimidate other countries into complying with their fantasies, but the fact on the ground is that China is one country and Taiwan is another. For China to claim Taiwan at this point makes them seem totally impotent. It's been DECADES, if it was theirs they'd have control of it by now. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's your opinion and not supported by any RS. Nobody including USA and Taiwan recognize Taiwanese independence. That's the fact. Unless you have a proper source proving otherwise, you can't just claim it's a fact.NewYearGOT (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is supported by the simple definition of the word independent. Taiwan is not subject to Beijing's control. Therefore it is independent of it. Recognition is not required. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- If that is the case, then shouldn't Abkhazia, Transnistria, Sahrawi Republic and Northern Cyprus be called countries as well, rather than being currently labelled as 'states' on Wikipedia? Donkey Hot-day (talk) 07:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Those articles are special cases whereas this one underwent extensive RfC to arrive at the consensus of “country”. We are not proposing changing this, but rather adding an island descriptor. Butterdiplomat (talk) 08:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am afraid it's not that simple. The term "independence" here carries more weight and complexity when referring to describing nations and territories. The concept involves not only control but also recognition and legitimacy in the eyes of the international community. Otherwise you can go to Crimea article and write it's not part of Ukraine only because Ukraine has no control over it. We don't do that because we can't oversimplify a complex situation and disregard significant political views. Many countries today dispute Taiwan's status as independent from China. Even ROC doesn't claim to be independent. If you don't think any of that matters, then go ahead and write it on the article that it's an independent nation and that other countries recognition do not matter at all. You can't as obviously international laws and official recognition matters enough.NewYearGOT (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- We do not use the word “independent” in the lede, though it is in fact independent from the PRC. Actually, by definition. As a concept and in terms of geographic control. So, it remains unclear what your argument is. Are you saying Taiwan (country) should not be called a country, Taiwan (country) should not be called an island country, or Taiwan (island) should not be called a country? It seems you have been fixated on that third concept, which is not what we are discussing here anyway. Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- If that is the case, then shouldn't Abkhazia, Transnistria, Sahrawi Republic and Northern Cyprus be called countries as well, rather than being currently labelled as 'states' on Wikipedia? Donkey Hot-day (talk) 07:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is supported by the simple definition of the word independent. Taiwan is not subject to Beijing's control. Therefore it is independent of it. Recognition is not required. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's your opinion and not supported by any RS. Nobody including USA and Taiwan recognize Taiwanese independence. That's the fact. Unless you have a proper source proving otherwise, you can't just claim it's a fact.NewYearGOT (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- And, just in case you are wondering, for Taiwan to claim China makes them look delusional. Both sides need to give it up. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- (Your unsolicited punditry isn't helpful to us here.) Remsense诉 17:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is your opinion and not supported by RS. You may as well say that “omitting ‘island country’ implies it is part of China”. We are not stating its status in relation to China by adding this qualifier. Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Referring to Taiwan as an island nation inherently implies it is independent from China. It is contradictory to call it an island nation while also asserting it is not independent from China. This inconsistency must be avoided for clarity and accuracy. See my below reply. NewYearGOT (talk) 21:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- The proposal is “island country”, not “island country independent from China”. So, the proposed language in fact does not contradict those official stances. In any case, we describe facts as is or as observed, and Wikipedia is not a log of official government stances. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Describing Taiwan as an independent island country on Wikipedia is misleading and lacks official backing. The ROC identifies itself as the legitimate government of all China, and no country, including the ROC, officially recognizes Taiwan as a separate, independent island state. Ignoring this official reality invites dispute as it contradicts the legal and political stance of the ROC and other nations. NewYearGOT (talk) 20:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think you may be confused here. Taiwan (if defined as the ROC) is in fact independent and separate from China (if defined as the PRC). If you are talking about a broader cultural and historical definition of country (superseding modern state boundaries), then Taiwan (country) being part of China (country) is in dispute but still satisfied by the proposal. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- We're describing the situation as it is. Remsense诉 20:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- If you call it as an island nation, you are basically saying it has approved separatism and relinquished their claims to the mainland. But that's not their situation. For other countries, there's no issues in calling it an island. But for Taiwan, you can't be treating it like the others when it has obvious political issues as calling it an island nation basically means officially separatist and independent from China. If you describe Taiwan this way, you must clarify soon afterwards that it is not officially independent from China and still claims all of China, otherwise you mislead people into thinking its official status has suddenly changed. NewYearGOT (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- The ROC constitution does not explicitly specify territorial boundaries. There is no rule or legal definition that says China cannot be an island country. Just because there was a historical ROC claim on the mainland, does not make Taiwan (country) part of the mainland. In addition, just because you think that Taiwan (country) is part of China, does not make it not made of islands. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan operates independently with its own government and is often called an island country in practical terms. However, it is not officially recognized as an island nor a separate country to China by many nations including even both ROC and PRC. China claims Taiwan as part of its territory, and Taiwan does not officially declare itself independent from China. This situation leads to limited international recognition and complicated diplomatic relations. Wikipedia strives for neutrality and accuracy, particularly on contentious topics like Taiwan's status. Calling it an island, just creates a whole new debate and issues on whether China is deemed an island and ROC can be called an island nation without contradicting its official stance that it represents all of China. NewYearGOT (talk) 20:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your first sentence is sensible and supports the proposal. The following points are less relevant for this article than for China. This article is about Taiwan, so if you think China should be defined differently, then that should be taken up with the China page. Butterdiplomat (talk) 21:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think we are going in circles, so I'll make this one last point. Officially recognizing Taiwan as not independent from China means that calling it an island nation contradicts that recognition, as no one recognizes China as an island. China is not an island. Hence, referring to Taiwan (ROC) as an island nation is akin to stating it has achieved complete separatism from China and is officially independent. It's a complex situation where both the PRC and ROC claim to be the legitimate government of all China but agree that Taiwan is not separate from China. Wikipedia cannot contradict this by asserting the opposite. Therefore, I agree with those who oppose this description as it invites significant issues regarding accuracy. NewYearGOT (talk) 21:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia neither gives nor has the ability to give “official recognition” - that’s not what we are doing here. If the actual situation (as you described in practical terms) contradicts official stances, then we can note it, as we already do in Political status of Taiwan. And once again, this article is about the country Taiwan, not China. It is about the ROC insofar as it overlaps with Taiwan (i.e., there is a separate article for pre-1949 ROC). Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not entirely sure these are valid points, perhaps you just aren't explaining them well? Maybe try again? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think we are going in circles, so I'll make this one last point. Officially recognizing Taiwan as not independent from China means that calling it an island nation contradicts that recognition, as no one recognizes China as an island. China is not an island. Hence, referring to Taiwan (ROC) as an island nation is akin to stating it has achieved complete separatism from China and is officially independent. It's a complex situation where both the PRC and ROC claim to be the legitimate government of all China but agree that Taiwan is not separate from China. Wikipedia cannot contradict this by asserting the opposite. Therefore, I agree with those who oppose this description as it invites significant issues regarding accuracy. NewYearGOT (talk) 21:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your first sentence is sensible and supports the proposal. The following points are less relevant for this article than for China. This article is about Taiwan, so if you think China should be defined differently, then that should be taken up with the China page. Butterdiplomat (talk) 21:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan operates independently with its own government and is often called an island country in practical terms. However, it is not officially recognized as an island nor a separate country to China by many nations including even both ROC and PRC. China claims Taiwan as part of its territory, and Taiwan does not officially declare itself independent from China. This situation leads to limited international recognition and complicated diplomatic relations. Wikipedia strives for neutrality and accuracy, particularly on contentious topics like Taiwan's status. Calling it an island, just creates a whole new debate and issues on whether China is deemed an island and ROC can be called an island nation without contradicting its official stance that it represents all of China. NewYearGOT (talk) 20:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia already does contradict the official position described here, as it does for many official positions for many countries around the world. CMD (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- My reason to oppose is because this is Wikipedia and not a tabloid. And it's the same reason why we don't say Taiwan is independent from China. Because legally and politically, they are not. Similarly, legally and politically, they are not an island nation as ROC doesn't identify themselves as separate from China, which is largely connected to the Eurasian continent. No country in the world recognise Taiwan as separate from China.
- Not even ROC identify itself as separate island from China. Has ROC completed separatism? No. So ROC is not legally an "island" then. This shouldn't even be a debate over this. When you call it an island nation, it introduces unnecessary confusion and controversy. Many people are literally going to assume that's a fact both legally and officially. And then you have to add clarifications that it's not separate from China officially etc. I may agree to calling it an island nation if it is immediately clarified that the ROC also does not identify itself as such legally and politically. However, this approach is just impractical and confusing, making it best to just maintain the current wording as is, which is less contradictory and less controversial.NewYearGOT (talk) 06:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a log of official government stances. So your two paragraphs here are not advancing our discussion here. Butterdiplomat (talk) 08:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not a log but those stances matter. We don't rely on effective control alone to define entities. Otherwise you might as well call Crimea as Russian and disregard international consensus because according to you, they don't matter. Wikipedia should not disregard official government perspectives or ignore the complexity of Taiwan's status. It's especially because this is a complicated politically charged issue that wikipedia should be neutral and represent all significant parties without taking sides. However nobody including ROC policy, Western countries are even saying it's an island nation. And there is obviously going to be parties that will strongly dispute it is one, so agree with Matt Smith and Fyunck(click) above that it's a politically charged statement that should be avoided if you can.NewYearGOT (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- We are not ignoring the complexity of its status. In fact, we extensively outline the views on its status in Political status of Taiwan. Again, for this country article, our objective is not to adhere to the policy or stance of any one state or government. It is to describe the situation as is and as characterized by reliable sources (which governments are not). Butterdiplomat (talk) 01:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not a log but those stances matter. We don't rely on effective control alone to define entities. Otherwise you might as well call Crimea as Russian and disregard international consensus because according to you, they don't matter. Wikipedia should not disregard official government perspectives or ignore the complexity of Taiwan's status. It's especially because this is a complicated politically charged issue that wikipedia should be neutral and represent all significant parties without taking sides. However nobody including ROC policy, Western countries are even saying it's an island nation. And there is obviously going to be parties that will strongly dispute it is one, so agree with Matt Smith and Fyunck(click) above that it's a politically charged statement that should be avoided if you can.NewYearGOT (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a log of official government stances. So your two paragraphs here are not advancing our discussion here. Butterdiplomat (talk) 08:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per input from CurryCity. The lead for one is meant to reflect what is in the majority of notable sources and it is hardly clear that most of them use the term 'island country'. Donkey Hot-day (talk) 07:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Status quo I favour to remain the way it is for the article. The introduction has made clear language regarding the country consisting of islands. Also a plenty of island nations' articles are not using descriptive term as "island country", but everyone knows they belong to the group, such as United Kingdom, Indonesia, Republic of Ireland, Dominican Republic or Brunei. It proves that it is no necessarity to put a specific geographical term, the current version is clear enough for an island nation.Pataya2527 (talk) 13:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Since a significant portion of the opposes seem to argue island is redundant (i.e., a matter of style vs. substance), I am curious what your stances are on the substance given the other arguments in the oppose camp. Are you in actuality neutral about this, since the majority (or significant amount) of island countries such as Japan, Cuba, Madagascar, Sri Lanka, Jamaica, Marshall Islands (with islands in its name!), etc. all have this descriptor? It seems to be a helpful descriptor in those cases as it would be here. Butterdiplomat (talk) 10:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Oppose There can only be 1 China at a time. This is ridiculous. Not even Taiwan recognizes itself as a country. My solution is to have the word; "country" removed entirelyfrom the 1st sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelpor (talk • contribs) 05:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not being proposed or contemplated in this discussion. It is also not relevant to this discussion. Please refer to the 2012 RM, 2020 RfC, and other discussions to understand what this article is about. Butterdiplomat (talk) 09:13, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 July 2024
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the intro chapter (4th paragraph, second sentence), it states, "The ROC maintained its claim of being the sole legitimate representative of China and its territory until 1991, when it ceased to regard the Chinese Communist Party as a rebellious group and recognized its control over mainland China."
While this sentence is technically accurate, it is misleading without further context. It implies that the ROC no longer claims the mainland and has become officially independent, which is not the case. The ROC still formally claims to be the legitimate government of all China, including the mainland, as reflected in its constitution and official stance. This crucial fact is omitted and needs to be included for a complete understanding.
Hence add after that sentence;
"However, the ROC has not given up its claim to all of China and still formally claims to be the legitimate government of both Taiwan and the mainland. This is reflected in Taiwan's constitution and official stance, which does not support separatism or relinquish its legal claim over the mainland."
And a link that supports this is; https://theconversation.com/when-people-say-the-west-should-support-taiwan-what-exactly-do-they-mean-186744 NewYearGOT (talk) 20:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- You may misunderstand the meaning of certain phrases "
…when it ceased to regard the Chinese Communist Party as a rebellious group and recognized its control over mainland China.
” which clearly states that the ROC government no longer regard the Chinese communist party (CCP) as rebellious group by the repeal of the Temporary Provisions, which was initially set in view of the Kuomintang's former plans to recapture the mainland. After the constitutional reform in 1991, the KMT effectively ceased to seek retaking the mainland territory and legally distinguish the rights between its actual-controlled territory and Mainland Area, though the constitutional terms regarding the sovereign right over the ROC’s “existing national boundaries” was not changed. - The government since then acknowledges the fact that the CCP exercises the jurisdiction over Mainland China and redefines the communist party as “Mainland authority”, so they can pursue further negotiation with the CCP as eligible participating party in subsequent semi-official meetings in 1992. Hence, the referring information you are questioning about is not wrong at all. The ROC does not officially recognise the PRC as a state entity, but they recognise the jurisdiction of the CCP over Mainland China. The KMT often refers this policy as “zh:兩岸互不承認主權,互不否認治權” (Mutual non-recognition of sovereignty and mutual non-denial of authority to govern). To recognise the jurisdiction of the CCP is not contradictory to the denial of the PRC’s sovereignty. Sheherherhers (talk) 19:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how any of that is relevant. I never challenged or stated that paragraph wasn't accurate. My point is that it needed additional information afterwards, which I proposed. And that additional proposed information is correct and relevant, and it's necessary for readers to be aware of it otherwise they will wrongfully assume that ROC had relinquished their claim to the mainland. Which isn't true hence why my proposal. NewYearGOT (talk) 05:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I simply don't agree that the passage requires the additional context as you claim: it would place an undue emphasis on technicalities. We'd also very much prefer a source more clearly expert than a Visiting Professor, War and Security Studies/International Genetics [???], King's College London, but that's slightly ancillary, I'm sure it's technically verifiable. Remsense诉 05:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your comment only proves why the additional information is necessary. By doubting the source, you inadvertently highlight the need for clarity. The "professor" is simply quoting an established legal fact: Taiwan (ROC) has not legally relinquished its claim to the mainland. The current article might mislead readers into thinking that the ROC has legally recognized PRC control of the mainland and thus relinquished its claim. (That's wrong). My proposal is so to ensure readers understand the nuanced full picture by including the legal fact that the ROC still officially claims the mainland, which is true and so doesn't mislead any readers into believing the opposite.NewYearGOT (talk) 05:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- What about changing "recognized" to "acknowledged"? It has less implications of formality, and reflects existing diplomatic language such as that of the USA regarding the One China policy. CMD (talk) 05:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- That seems reasonable to me. Remsense诉 05:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm making the change to "acknowledged" and other related information. Vacosea (talk) 10:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- What about changing "recognized" to "acknowledged"? It has less implications of formality, and reflects existing diplomatic language such as that of the USA regarding the One China policy. CMD (talk) 05:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your comment only proves why the additional information is necessary. By doubting the source, you inadvertently highlight the need for clarity. The "professor" is simply quoting an established legal fact: Taiwan (ROC) has not legally relinquished its claim to the mainland. The current article might mislead readers into thinking that the ROC has legally recognized PRC control of the mainland and thus relinquished its claim. (That's wrong). My proposal is so to ensure readers understand the nuanced full picture by including the legal fact that the ROC still officially claims the mainland, which is true and so doesn't mislead any readers into believing the opposite.NewYearGOT (talk) 05:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I simply don't agree that the passage requires the additional context as you claim: it would place an undue emphasis on technicalities. We'd also very much prefer a source more clearly expert than a Visiting Professor, War and Security Studies/International Genetics [???], King's College London, but that's slightly ancillary, I'm sure it's technically verifiable. Remsense诉 05:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how any of that is relevant. I never challenged or stated that paragraph wasn't accurate. My point is that it needed additional information afterwards, which I proposed. And that additional proposed information is correct and relevant, and it's necessary for readers to be aware of it otherwise they will wrongfully assume that ROC had relinquished their claim to the mainland. Which isn't true hence why my proposal. NewYearGOT (talk) 05:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Could we add the line "country with limited recognition"?
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In line with partially recognized states such as Kosovo, Abkhazia, etc, can we please include the line "is a country in East Asia with partial recognition"? The ROC is not officially a legitimate state of China anymore by a vast majority of nations including the G20 and EU but most also consider the status of Taiwan unclear after the Treaty of San Francisco remains in force. I also want the status on the infobox added up again. ---Silence of Lambs (talk) 15:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Countries aren't of limited recognition, states are. Please acknowledge the existence of WP:OTHERCONTENT. Remsense诉 15:28, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think that distinction is helpful on its own, but it does lend towards Taiwan being not like Kosovo or Abkhazia, as has been discussed before. CMD (talk) 16:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- This issue has been brought in multiple occasions and people should realise that the equation of the ROC/Taiwan with other breakaway states is a false analogy, as the historical context are totally different on how these political entities came into being.
- 1. Taiwan/ROC is never a breakaway state as Abkhazia or Kosovo, which did not secede from the communist China and has been a sovereign state in its own right since 1912, they were basically two rival states vying for their legitimacy of "China", so it's more similar to present-day North/south Korea relations, despite competing each other in overlapping territorial claims, they're generally two states co-existed who exercise sovereignty in their respective actual-controlled territories
- 2. Taiwan have satisfied all the criterian of four pillar elements that constitute a sovereign state, not to mention that it used to attend as a full member state in the UN. The declarative theory outlined in the 1933 Montevideo Convention describes a state in Article 1 as:
- Having a permanent population
- Having a defined territory
- Having a government
- Having the ability to enter into relations with foreign states
- Last but not least, the creation and continuity of a state is only a factual issue, not a legal question. Declarations and recognition by other states is unable to impact on their existence of statehood. According to the declaratory theory of recognition,
the act of recognition signifies no more than the acceptance of an already-existing factual situation— i.e., conformity with the criteria of statehood, the recognition of third states is not a requirement for being a state.
Most of the cited declarations by politicians from other states are not legal statements but solely political intents based on their own interest. - Sheherherhers (talk) 18:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- This does not prevent Taiwan from being described as a country with limited recognition. ZeehanLin (talk) 07:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't make any sense to say; it is a conflation in categories. Remsense诉 08:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- This does not prevent Taiwan from being described as a country with limited recognition. ZeehanLin (talk) 07:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not that factually wrong, but it's already covered in the lower section that few states have diplomatic ties with Taiwan. These states recognize the ROC as the government of all of China, not merely as an island nation separate from the rest of China. For better context, I propose to add: Taiwan maintains official diplomatic relations with 11 out of 193 UN member states and the Holy See, which recognize the ROC as the legitimate government of all of China, instead of the PRC.NewYearGOT (talk) 06:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think you're going to have trouble finding sourcing for that claim. Kanguole 21:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- (+)AGREE
- There is still controversy over whether Taiwan is a country, even though Wikipedia has reached a consensus. I think "with limited recognition" should be added as a compromise to ease the controversy and let readers understand the complexity of Taiwan. This modification itself does not contain any factual errors.ZeehanLin (talk) 14:31, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really think America is a "real country", but that's a societal rather than a political commentary on my part. States and counties are distinct entities and we would be remiss to conflate the two, which is what this phrasing does.
- Also, we are all literate here, and can largely tell when you agree with something without an attention-grabbing green "agree" header. Remsense诉 14:39, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- The political disagreement over whether or not to recognize the ROC as a state or the societal question of whether to recognize Taiwan as a country is not really helpful in the first sentence. The former is discussed in the intro and extensively in its own article Political status of Taiwan, and the latter is purely academic and theoretical. Factually speaking, there is little question. As a matter of recognition, there are differing views. But to add it in the first sentence unnecessarily blurs the topic in my view. Butterdiplomat (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the change in the first sentence makes Taiwan's nature completely different. The nature before the amendment was controversial, while the nature after the amendment is closer to the facts and avoids controversy to the greatest extent. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the addition in the sentence makes it controversial. Additionally, as explained, I don’t think it is helpful to discuss a societal question in the first sentence of this article. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- In many places, saying "Taiwan is a country" would cause great controversy and cause great negative impact (such as business loss) to some people who are not aware of the controversy. I hope to reflect the complexity of the Taiwan issue in the first sentence.
- if you decide to reply me, i hope you see my statement on some of the discussions I have made. Thanks for your cooperation. ZeehanLin (talk) 18:23, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have read your statement and acknowledge your stance. However, for the avoidance of doubt, Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, and it is not its responsibility to appease any authority that may like to censor or obscure information by threatening business losses. Thank you. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- So? You mean such coercion should be appeased only because the reference to Taiwan as a country make Chinese netizens or CCP advocates unhappy?? Do you think that the loss of business is a fair reason to coerce people obedient to CCP ideology as a right thing to do? May I remind you that this space is shared by people all over the world and the editing of the content is largely decided by general discussion and consensus. It’s no place for you to enforce anyone here to be in line with the Chinese communist stance, only because current version defied your political ideology. Pataya2527 (talk) 21:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pataya2527, WATCH YOUR WORDS!
- I NEVER said nor wanted to express "such coercion should be appeased only because the reference to Taiwan as a country make Chinese netizens or CCP advocates unhappy", "the loss of business is a fair reason to coerce people obedient to CCP ideology as a right thing to do" or "enforce anyone here to be in line with the Chinese communist stance". If I really wanted to do this, I should have directly proposed editing it to "Taiwan is a province of China", which is what the CCP wants.
- According to WP:ICA, your actions are suspected of violating Article 2e.
- I hope everyone can communicate peacefully here. ZeehanLin (talk) 17:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is veering into forum territory, which Wikipedia is not. Can we please keep to the substance and not bring up what the CCP would or would not want, given its irrelevancy? Butterdiplomat (talk) 17:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- TAIWAN currently has formal diplomatic relations with 11 of the 193 United Nations member states and with the Holy See, which governs the Vatican City State, as of 16 Jan 2024.[1]Only 13 UN states and Vatican City acknowledging it as a country. [2]The technical reason for this is that only a dozen small countries and the Holy See officially recognise Taiwan, whose formal name is the Republic of China. [3]Taiwan is not recognised on the international stage.[4]Because of these I made suggestions for changes.I don't know if these sources are available, but I can see the same or similar ones in Wikipedia. ZeehanLin (talk) 18:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- These points are included in the intro in a later paragraph. The main article for these facts about recognition would be Foreign relations of Taiwan or Political status of Taiwan. I oppose adding them to the first sentence for the reasons already mentioned above. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Let's take a look at how some other countries are described in the first sentence of Wikipedia.
- United States: The United States of America (USA or U.S.A.), commonly known as the United States (US or U.S.) or America, is a country primarily located in North America.
- United Kingdom: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the United Kingdom (UK) or Britain, is a country in Northwestern Europe, off the coast of the continental mainland.
- Kosovo:Kosovo, officially the Republic of Kosovo,is a country in Southeast Europe with partial diplomatic recognition.
- Abkhazia:Abkhazia (/æbˈkɑːziə/ ⓘ ab-KAH-zee-ə), officially the Republic of Abkhazia,is a partially recognised state in the South Caucasus, …
- Northern Cyprus:,[a] officially the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC),[b] is a de facto state[6][7] that comprises the northeastern portion of the island of Cyprus.
- The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic:,[e] also known as the Sahrawi Republic and Western Sahara, is a partially recognized state,
- These points are included in the intro in a later paragraph. The main article for these facts about recognition would be Foreign relations of Taiwan or Political status of Taiwan. I oppose adding them to the first sentence for the reasons already mentioned above. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the addition in the sentence makes it controversial. Additionally, as explained, I don’t think it is helpful to discuss a societal question in the first sentence of this article. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the change in the first sentence makes Taiwan's nature completely different. The nature before the amendment was controversial, while the nature after the amendment is closer to the facts and avoids controversy to the greatest extent. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
ZeehanLin (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Taiwan is the only one with no words like "de facto” “limited recognition” and more, which was added in the first sentence, in the List of states with limited recognition#States that are not state parties within the United Nations System. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- The status and phrasing of Taiwan's statehood was pretty clearly determined in the 2020 RfC linked at the top of this page. You are not introducing a new argument, and I would encourage you to read the talk page archive. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I only saw that Taiwan should be defined as a country instead of a state. If I have overlooked something, please let me know, thanks. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, the limited recognition construct was discussed and rejected in the 2020 RfC. In addition, another editor above explained why Taiwan was different from Kosovo and others (i.e. it was never a breakaway state). Please review the previous discussions on this topic and provide a new argument if you are proposing a change. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry. I still can’t find the consensus about not marking limited recognition in WP:TWRFC. I only found someone mentioned limited recognition to support his/her point.
- I also see these in WP:TWRFC:
•We have agreement that most nations don't recognize Taiwan as an independent country, (and people pointing that out tended to use that as an argument for "state").
•We have no real dispute about if Taiwan is de facto a country (has an army, currency, navy, passport, internet TLD, telephone country code, etc.)- Which consensus I only saw in WP:TWRFC is:
(As such, I'm closing this RfC as finding consensus that) it is best to refer to Taiwan as a "country" rather than as a "state".
- If you find a consensus (not discussion) in WP:TWRFC that rejected limited recognition construct (not referring to Taiwan as a country), please send in the original text. ZeehanLin (talk) 03:19, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- In the discussion, there were various points where the construct was brought up. The country vs. state debate was a broader discussion about the nature of how Taiwan was to be characterized, and it was pretty clearly determined that country was the appropriate term and this in spite of most UN member states not recognizing it as such. Since this article is about the country primarily, and not the country's international recognition or political status (again, those have their own main articles), it makes sense to keep the first sentence as is. Please refer to benlisquare's comments, because many of them address your view. Butterdiplomat (talk) 11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Too many original researches in benlisquare's comments like "countries de facto recognise the de facto existence of Taiwan as a country in reality, while
playing roundabout mind games to appease the PRC
. it ma ZeehanLin (talk) 12:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC) - Taiwan cannot be compared with these controversial countries, because of
"Taiwan is able exert much more economic, military and political force than Palestine can ever dream of as of this current day"
?I don't know what rules Wikipedia has for explaining ideas this way. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Too many original researches in benlisquare's comments like "countries de facto recognise the de facto existence of Taiwan as a country in reality, while
- In the discussion, there were various points where the construct was brought up. The country vs. state debate was a broader discussion about the nature of how Taiwan was to be characterized, and it was pretty clearly determined that country was the appropriate term and this in spite of most UN member states not recognizing it as such. Since this article is about the country primarily, and not the country's international recognition or political status (again, those have their own main articles), it makes sense to keep the first sentence as is. Please refer to benlisquare's comments, because many of them address your view. Butterdiplomat (talk) 11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, the limited recognition construct was discussed and rejected in the 2020 RfC. In addition, another editor above explained why Taiwan was different from Kosovo and others (i.e. it was never a breakaway state). Please review the previous discussions on this topic and provide a new argument if you are proposing a change. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Consensus can change.(WP:CCC)(edited 03:32, 29 July 2024(UTC), by ZeehanLin, because of no consensus found)I don't think Taiwan qualifies as a special case in the List of states with limited recognition#States that are not state parties within the United Nations System. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)- If you are bringing forward the same exact proposal that has been reviewed before without introducing new arguments, then I think it is reasonable to defer to the existing consensus. Butterdiplomat (talk) 20:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I only saw that Taiwan should be defined as a country instead of a state. If I have overlooked something, please let me know, thanks. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- The status and phrasing of Taiwan's statehood was pretty clearly determined in the 2020 RfC linked at the top of this page. You are not introducing a new argument, and I would encourage you to read the talk page archive. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- AFAIK, no country recognizes Taiwan as a country. Instead, they countinue to recognize the Republic of China as the government of China, long after it lost control of the mainland and do not recognize the PRC as the legitimate government. TFD (talk) 12:36, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- As mentioned above, those are policy stances relating to the state and more properly addressed in Foreign relations of Taiwan and Political status of Taiwan. These topics are of course discussed in this article, but should not be included in the first sentence. This article is about the country, encompassing more than just the government. Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- The state is also more than the government. If there is a good source about Taiwan the country not being Taiwan the state that would be interesting, but in general this is not a distinction most sources will make. TFD's explanation is the reason partial recognition as a concept doesn't really work here, Taiwan isn't a breakaway state. CMD (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I will concede that most sources do not make this distinction. In any case, it is not worth going into this further given I also agree on the exclusion of the partial recognition concept. If you swap “country” for “state” in my above comment, my point still stands. Butterdiplomat (talk) 23:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- The state is also more than the government. If there is a good source about Taiwan the country not being Taiwan the state that would be interesting, but in general this is not a distinction most sources will make. TFD's explanation is the reason partial recognition as a concept doesn't really work here, Taiwan isn't a breakaway state. CMD (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- As mentioned above, those are policy stances relating to the state and more properly addressed in Foreign relations of Taiwan and Political status of Taiwan. These topics are of course discussed in this article, but should not be included in the first sentence. This article is about the country, encompassing more than just the government. Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Nauru switches diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China". AP News. Associated Press. 16 January 2024. Retrieved 19 March 2024.
- ^ "Countries that Recognize Taiwan 2024". World Population Review. World Population Review.
- ^ "Is Taiwan a country?". Hong Kong Free Press. Explainer by Hong Kong Free Press.
- ^ "Why Taiwan is not recognised on the international stage". The Economist. A.H., the Economist explainer.
RfC for adding "with limited recognition" in the first sentence
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Should "with limited recognition" be added in the first sentence? ZeehanLin (talk) 13:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):
− Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC),is a country in East Asia.+ Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC),is a country with limited recognitions in East Asia.− {{Short description|Country in East Asia}}+ {{Short description|Country with limited recognitions in East Asia}} - Why it should be changed
[1]: Taiwan is the only one with no words like "de facto” “limited recognition” and more, which was added in the first sentence, in the List of states with limited recognition#States that are not state parties within the United Nations System. This may violate WP:NPOV.
"With limited recognition" should be added in the first sentence to let readers understand the complexity of Taiwan.
"COUNTRY WITH LIMITED RECOGNITION" DOES NOT VIOLATE "TAIWAN IS A COUNTRY" IN WP:TWRFC.
References
- ^ In this discussion Talk:Taiwan#Could we add the line "country with limited recognition"?, there is no reliable evidence to prove that this modification is wrong. On the contrary, there is reliable evidence to prove that this modification is reasonable. Therefore, it can be considered that there is no dispute on this modification.
- References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):
"Nauru switches diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China". AP News. Associated Press. 16 January 2024. Retrieved 19 March 2024.
"Countries that Recognize Taiwan 2024". World Population Review. World Population Review.
"Is Taiwan a country?". Hong Kong Free Press. Explainer by Hong Kong Free Press.
"Why Taiwan is not recognised on the international stage". The Economist. A.H., the Economist explainer.
ZeehanLin (talk) 13:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- These whole partial recognition debate, to be frankly, are virtually based on a false analogy to deliberately confuse Taiwan (ROC) with other breakaway states, which means you tend to use the partial-recognized feature in order to categorise them all as the same kind, and not just overlook, also disregard their historical context that emerged from, while making your own judgement regarding the use of "country" in Taiwan topic as an unfair treatment upon other states also with lesser universal recognition.
- The creation and continuity of a state is only a factual issue, not a legal question. Declarations and recognition by other states cannot have any impact on their existence. According to the declaratory theory of recognition,
the act of recognition signifies no more than the acceptance of an already-existing factual situation— i.e., conformity with the criteria of statehood, the recognition of third states is not a requirement for being a state.
Most of the cited declarations by politicians from other states are not legal statements but solely political intents.
- The creation and continuity of a state is only a factual issue, not a legal question. Declarations and recognition by other states cannot have any impact on their existence. According to the declaratory theory of recognition,
- The amount of formal recognition is not a judgement on how a state is more eligible to be defined as an independent state, which is a unilateral political act by a government based on their political interests for the admission to a country’s statehood. That's largely affected by the hard power of a nation to project its influence in the global arena against what they deemed an entity as “disputed regimes”.
- For example, such as Kosovo, receives more formal recognition, not because they are more important or legitimate than one another, which is only because Serbia as a small power does not have the same influence to prevent other states from establishing international relations with Kosovo as Chinese government did. If Serbia is a nuclear country or a permanent member in the UN systems, or top five most ranked economic or military powers of the world, then we can compare them in an equal basis. Hence, the amount of formal diplomatic recognition is not an excuse for you to justify your assertion. Sheherherhers (talk) 13:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would like to say that the term I requested to be added was "with limited recognition", and it was never "breakaway states", nor does it involve the question of whether it is a sovereign state. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Making your own judgement regarding the use of 'country' in Taiwan topic as an unfair treatment upon other states also with lesser universal recognition" Why fair? It's also your own judgement. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Country with limited recognition" does not violate "Taiwan is a country" in WP:TWRFC. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would like to say that the term I requested to be added was "with limited recognition", and it was never "breakaway states", nor does it involve the question of whether it is a sovereign state. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- And it is worth notifying that the lead article contains an entire paragraph to elaborate the sovereign dispute and political status of Taiwan, not like you said there is no mention about the ongoing controversy of this topic Sheherherhers (talk) 13:50, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Not done: Please see the notice at the top of the page and RfC on the topic – macaddct1984 (talk | contribs) 14:04, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I still can’t find the consensus about not marking limited recognition in WP:TWRFC. I only found someone mentioned limited recognition to support his/her point.
- I also see these in WP:TWRFC:
•We have agreement that most nations don't recognize Taiwan as an independent country, (and people pointing that out tended to use that as an argument for "state").
•We have no real dispute about if Taiwan is de facto a country (has an army, currency, navy, passport, internet TLD, telephone country code, etc.)- Which consensus I only saw in WP:TWRFC is:
(As such, I'm closing this RfC as finding consensus that) it is best to refer to Taiwan as a "country" rather than as a "state".
- If you find a consensus (not discussion) in WP:TWRFC that rejected limited recognition construct (not referring to Taiwan as a country), please send in the original text.
- By the way, there are too many original researches in benlisquare's comments like "countries de facto recognise the de facto existence of Taiwan as a country in reality, while
playing roundabout mind games to appease the PRC
. Taiwan cannot be compared with these controversial countries, just because of"Taiwan is able exert much more economic, military and political force than Palestine can ever dream of as of this current day"
?I don't know what rules Wikipedia has for explaining ideas this way. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:09, 29 July 2024 (UTC)- Isn't your comparison of breakaway states with Taiwan also based on the similar paradox, with China is able to intervene other countries to build ties with Taiwan, because Chinese government can intimate them for loss of business or diplomatic pressure by force? then why brought up Taiwan's total strenth to be capable standing out of the crowd becoming a new thing for you? Sheherherhers (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have never say something like this. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:24, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- If a fat man forcibly kicks a thin man off a boat, do you say that the thin man is currently on the boat? The fact has already happened, even if it is not reasonable or just. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- In this case, the objective fact is that the thin guy was kicked off the boat. Based on our sympathy or other reasons, we may side with the thin guy. But the objective fact is that this is the case. Wikipedia is not a place to express sympathy or help Taiwan.(of course it is not a place to help and promote China either). ZeehanLin (talk) 14:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't your comparison of breakaway states with Taiwan also based on the similar paradox, with China is able to intervene other countries to build ties with Taiwan, because Chinese government can intimate them for loss of business or diplomatic pressure by force? then why brought up Taiwan's total strenth to be capable standing out of the crowd becoming a new thing for you? Sheherherhers (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
"Country with limited recognition" does not violate "taiwan is a country" in WP:TWRFC.
- Yes it does, it is a different description than the one with consensus in the previous rfc. Are you sure that this is a valid rfc and not just restating an argument that has already been brought up in the previous one, and not adding much to change the current consensus? 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 17:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)- Also, please spare the all caps. You don't need to scream in a civilized discussion. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 17:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose No countries recognize Taiwan as a country. Instead, they recognize the Republic of China as being the legitimate government of China, including the mainland. Also, the fact that Taiwan participates in international bodies does not mean its claim to independence is recognized. Lots of subnational units participate in such bodies. The Canada provinces of Quebec and New Brunswick for example are members of the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie. TFD (talk) 19:55, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm wondering who you're trying to oppose. From your point of view, it seems that you are more in favor of not being recognized, is that right? ZeehanLin (talk) 01:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- It may be considered bad form to confront people making their !votes as the proposer, given they've provided an adequately detailed explanation. I'm going to join the chorus of other more experienced editors in explicitly asking you to relax a bit. Remsense诉 01:59, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I’m not confronting him.I just think his statement seems to be more conducive to my point of view ZeehanLin (talk) 02:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, my bad. Disregard what I said here. Remsense诉 02:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am opposed to saying Taiwan is "a country with limited recognition," because it has no recognition as a country. That is not to say I think it should be called a country with no recognition. The status of Taiwan is complex which means per NPOV that there are few things we can say about its status with absolute certainty. TFD (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- You said elsewhere there is consensus that Taiwan is a country. Whatever we agree here, there is no consensus in reliable sources that Taiwan is a country. But that brings up another problem, that the term country can mean different things and it is understood by readers according to context. TFD (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I’m not confronting him.I just think his statement seems to be more conducive to my point of view ZeehanLin (talk) 02:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- It may be considered bad form to confront people making their !votes as the proposer, given they've provided an adequately detailed explanation. I'm going to join the chorus of other more experienced editors in explicitly asking you to relax a bit. Remsense诉 01:59, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your statement about no countries recognizing Taiwan as a country but the legitamate government of China instead is factually incorrect. In this UN document, 14 countries recognized that
Taiwan is a free and peace-loving sovereign State, and its democratically elected Government is the sole legitimate Government that can represent the interests and wishes of the 23 million people of Taiwan. Since Taiwan transformed into a full-fledged modern democracy after a series of political reforms, it no longer intends to compete with the People’s Republic of China for the so-called “representation of China”.
--108.53.191.58 (talk) 06:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm wondering who you're trying to oppose. From your point of view, it seems that you are more in favor of not being recognized, is that right? ZeehanLin (talk) 01:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per 0xDeadbeef above. Please also note ZeehanLin proposed a major change to the first sentence and short description without also providing a rationale. The editor listed a few news articles about foreign relations of Taiwan, but the existence of news does not support a change in the article. Butterdiplomat (talk) 00:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Nothing really changed from last discussions and agree with Deadbeef above. First a discussion should have been had to see if there was mixed thoughts on both sides of this issue. The discussion looks one sided. They said they are a newbie from mainland China so chalk it up to a learning experience, but the first lines had many many explosions in the past until the very stable version we see today was decided upon. And the person who originally brought up this topic was blocked for POV pushing. No reason for a change here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
The discussion looks one sided
just becausethey said they are a newbie from mainland China
? ZeehanLin (talk) 02:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)- Those are two separate sentences making two separate points, why have you connected them in quotation? Remsense诉 02:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for the editorial, semantic, and consensus-based reasons articulated by myself and others above. Remsense诉 01:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- To be honest, I am surprised and astonished by your opposition.
- There is a consensus that Taiwan is a country.
- There is a consensus that Taiwan is not widely recognized internationally (as a country).
- Why is it difficult to combine the two and put them in the first sentence?
- This is a supplement rather than a modification. ZeehanLin (talk) 02:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- We have attempted to articulate a distinction between "state" and "country". I do not want to be rude in the slightest, so please let me know if I am—but is this point clear to you, even if you disagree? Though it's not just an English or Chinese thing, but sometimes these nuanced terms don't exactly translate between languages and can lead to misunderstandings between first- and second-language speakers at every level: my Chinese is rudimentary, but I know enough to know they both usually translate to 国. Again, my deep apologies if I'm being ignorant, I just figured this was worth clearing up if possible. Remsense诉 02:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out, maybe I misunderstood a little bit. I have some understanding of the difference between a state and a country, but not in depth. I want to know whether there is a concept of a country being recognized or not.(I have seen such a concept.) I also want to know the difference between Taiwan being not recognized as a state and Taiwan being not recognized as a country. ZeehanLin (talk) 02:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- So, while these terms overlap and are used interchangeably quite a bit, which I imagine is creating a lot of this confusion, we really try to use them precisely when writing for the encyclopedia. I understand it like this: in English, state is much more narrowly identifying a particular political entity, while country implies a broader, more interdisciplinary scope, if that makes sense. The Republic of China is a state, and the Qing were a state, but they were both states that represent the country of China. I'll return to my example above. If I said "America is not a real country", I'm not really saying that the US state institutions aren't functioning; instead, I'm making broader social commentary, perhaps about what it's like to be an American, perhaps some historical analysis reaching back to the founding of the country—e.g. something like "my fellow Americans don't treat each other like countrymen". On the other hand, if I said "America is a failed state"—that is more specifically saying the current American government is dysfunctional, or perhaps that it is failing the country.
- On Wikipedia, our articles about countries are usually also about the states that presently represent them. In modernity, many states are nation-states—nation is another tricky nuanced word translating to [undefined] Error: {{Lang}}: no text (help), again with different connotations, but it's roughly same idea in this specific case: countries emerge as social realities once people who live there identify themselves with them—though this often comes about due to a state's intentional influence. In this sense, for a significant time after the American state was established, America didn't really exist as a "country" in the way it does now—for a century plus, many Americans identified themselves more with their local territory (Virginia, New York) instead. Since it is very young, the process of "America" coming into existence as a country is perhaps more "well-documented" in the historical record. In some ways, these concepts are arguably historically interlinked more tightly in China than anywhere else, since the political history is so long and contiguous, the state is so easy to see as the same thing as the country. (Forgive me if I'm sounding orientalist, it's of course much more complex if you drill down into Chinese history.)
- So, that's what we're getting at when we say that countries aren't internationally recognized or unrecognized, as diplomatic recognition is a political act between modern governments. If one says that Taiwan is a country with limited recognition, that could be taken as much deeper statement about how Taiwanese society is not "recognized" by others somehow.
- I'm not the best at explaining these things, so please let me know if it makes sense? Remsense诉 06:38, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's much more complex than that since English uses the terms state and country interchangeably. And it can have a different subtle meaning in American English vs British English. For years this was at "Taiwan is a state." Sometimes it said "Sovereign State" but by and large it sat at state. A large RfC took place that determined that in English the phrase "Taiwan is a country" is used more often so that's where it sits today. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- For an example of "country" and "state" being used in the opposite way regarding notions of recognition, legitimacy, and broadly occupying a piece of land to the way they are being used in this discussion/article, see Talk:Kosovo/Archive 33#Fifteen years. Fifteen long years., although despite the different interpretations the final wording ended up being the same. "Country" is simply inherently flexible. CMD (talk) 07:59, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- If that is the case, then from a cultural and historical perspective, China and Taiwan have a lot in common, so Taiwan was not originally a country. The CCP and KMT are enemies. The KMT lost to the CCP in the Chinese Civil War, and the KMT came to Taiwan with its ROC government. At the time, it was just a split at the state level. Later, the DPP emerged, and the DPP also regarded the CCP as an enemy. In order not to be ruled by the enemy CCP, the DDP promoted "de-Sinicization" when it was in power, advocating that Taiwan was a country. ZeehanLin (talk) 15:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is an example of WP:OR to be avoided, and bordering on WP:SOAP. As a reminder, Wikipedia articles and talk pages are not a forum for you to publish your personal thoughts and theories of history. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- This appears to be original research, but it can be verified. Sorry I don't have the energy to sort it out and cite the sources. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- While your enthusiasm is appreciated, you do have the option to not make a post until it is ready to be used in a constructive discussion. Otherwise, your arguments (if any) may be easily discounted by others as original research or even disruptive behavior. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- This appears to be original research, but it can be verified. Sorry I don't have the energy to sort it out and cite the sources. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is an example of WP:OR to be avoided, and bordering on WP:SOAP. As a reminder, Wikipedia articles and talk pages are not a forum for you to publish your personal thoughts and theories of history. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's much more complex than that since English uses the terms state and country interchangeably. And it can have a different subtle meaning in American English vs British English. For years this was at "Taiwan is a state." Sometimes it said "Sovereign State" but by and large it sat at state. A large RfC took place that determined that in English the phrase "Taiwan is a country" is used more often so that's where it sits today. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out, maybe I misunderstood a little bit. I have some understanding of the difference between a state and a country, but not in depth. I want to know whether there is a concept of a country being recognized or not.(I have seen such a concept.) I also want to know the difference between Taiwan being not recognized as a state and Taiwan being not recognized as a country. ZeehanLin (talk) 02:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) The limited modification suggested is likely to mislead readers who are familiar with the state of Taiwan as it is today. The recognitions the country has are not recent recognitions of the Taiwan of today, but holdover recognitions from a very different political situation. It is difficult to combine them in the first sentence as it is an unusual situation that is somewhat unique in current times. CMD (talk) 02:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is precisely because of the uniqueness of Taiwan's current situation that it is a bit hasty to simply describe Taiwan as a country without discussing its international status and recognition in the first sentence. In addition, some readers who think they understand Taiwan's current situation may not be comprehensive in their introduction. ZeehanLin (talk) 02:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- We can only fit so much into the first sentence, per MOS:LEADCLUTTER. The relevant information is given a whole paragraph, the longest paragraph in the lead, to help readers who may not have a comprehensive understanding. CMD (talk) 07:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- But this guideline does not indicate what should not be included in the first sentence, which can lead to different opinions among everyone. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's right: there's flexibility for "common sense" intuitions about style and diction. Site policies and guidelines, including the Manual of Style, are very deliberately not trying to cover everything that could be the subject of dispute. We've hashed out our reasons, and that's how consensus works. Think about policies and guidelines as "prefabricated consensus"—typically stronger such that local consensus can't decide to override it without a good reason, but still basically just a record of conversations like these. Remsense诉 12:18, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- But this guideline does not indicate what should not be included in the first sentence, which can lead to different opinions among everyone. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- We can only fit so much into the first sentence, per MOS:LEADCLUTTER. The relevant information is given a whole paragraph, the longest paragraph in the lead, to help readers who may not have a comprehensive understanding. CMD (talk) 07:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is precisely because of the uniqueness of Taiwan's current situation that it is a bit hasty to simply describe Taiwan as a country without discussing its international status and recognition in the first sentence. In addition, some readers who think they understand Taiwan's current situation may not be comprehensive in their introduction. ZeehanLin (talk) 02:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- We have attempted to articulate a distinction between "state" and "country". I do not want to be rude in the slightest, so please let me know if I am—but is this point clear to you, even if you disagree? Though it's not just an English or Chinese thing, but sometimes these nuanced terms don't exactly translate between languages and can lead to misunderstandings between first- and second-language speakers at every level: my Chinese is rudimentary, but I know enough to know they both usually translate to 国. Again, my deep apologies if I'm being ignorant, I just figured this was worth clearing up if possible. Remsense诉 02:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Why not add 'limited recognition' to the first sentence of the People's Republic of China? Same argument I would say. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 07:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say that, because while it would be UNDUE in this article, it would frankly be an order of magnitude moreso on China. Remsense诉 08:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- As the current representative of China, the PRC is a member of the United Nations and can be widely recognized by countries (widely but not completely). In contrast, Taiwan only has a small amount of recognition, and more exchanges are not based on exchanges between countries. ZeehanLin (talk) 15:42, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I personally think that "Taiwan is a country with limited recognition" can show the complexity of Taiwan as it is, and also provide flexibility for people with different views.
- If a person supports that Taiwan is a country, a country with limited recognition belongs to the category of a country, and a country will not disappear because of non-recognition.
- If a person supports that Taiwan is not a country, then the term limited recognition can reflect that most countries do not recognize Taiwan as a country, and some activities in the name of countries are restricted by relevant laws.
- (Personal opinion, not as any basis) ZeehanLin (talk) 15:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
...creating Draft:Taiwan which has no chance of being implemented...
by someone, on another page, 08:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Many of you(actually not many but some) have already preconceived that my changes are wrong and ultimately unworkable. Many of you are not seeking the truth, but are trying to exclude "intrusions" from people like me, whether reasonable or unreasonable. I have always taken this matter seriously, and I have looked for sources to maintain neutrality as much as possible, but many you think this is a kind of "sabotage".I am very sorry to see such a Wikipedia.If many of your attitude is like this, and goes against WP:NPOV, then I will withdraw from the discussion because it is meaningless.Sorry to disrupt the discussion here, but some people's behavior makes me angry.(I'm not targeting anyone specifically, many people do this, I'm just picking one randomly as an example.)- Allow me to emphasize that do not preconceive that my changes are wrong and ultimately unworkable.Thanks ZeehanLin (talk) 16:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- We did not preconceive that you are wrong. We conversed with you, some attempted to broach the same points repeatedly, and you have not adequately addressed them. You have simply not convinced us.
- There is no getting around one of the core problems that has been repeatedly brought up. While I get what you mean when you say you personally think [the phrase] can show the complexity of Taiwan as it is, I am trying to make clear to you that this is just not the case. Instead, due to the peculiarities of certain English vocabulary terms (e.g. 'country' versus 'state') the phrasing creates different connotations for many people reading than it does for you.
- So far, I have tried not to make explicit that this may be something you need to defer to native speakers on, but I hope I'm taken in good faith when I say that now. Remsense诉 17:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with what you said. You are not one of the "
many of you
" I mentioned. ZeehanLin (talk) 17:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)- Apologies if I myself are repeatedly jumping to conclusions. Remsense诉 17:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with what you said. You are not one of the "
- I wonder if a maintenance template could be added to reflect the dispute in this case. ZeehanLin (talk) 19:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do not think that is necessary, given we have a stable version and there is arguably a renewed consensus against your proposal. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Adding "with limited recognition" would be giving a weight to this aspect of Taiwan's international status that would be inappropriate for the first sentence. The subtleties of its status are already covered in some detail a couple paragraphs later in the lead, and in greater detail later in the article. This is sufficient. Phlar (talk) 01:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- According to the current results, almost all opinions are "oppose". I follow the rules and do not make any changes.
- I still wonder whether such a description gives people the impression that Taiwan's international status is the same as that of a country like the United States. Because they are essentially described as countries. I am concerned about this possible result, which is why I advocate for revision. If this concern can be resolved, it will be a more perfect ending. ZeehanLin (talk) 10:30, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is indeed a country, as you mentioned earlier. Recognition (or lack thereof) of the state is discussed extensively later in the article and in related, more appropriate articles. No revision is needed unless you bring forward a new argument. Butterdiplomat (talk) 10:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Probably Taipei promotes the view that Taiwan is a country, which they don't officially accept, in order to obtain sympathy. TFD (talk) 16:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- In all the ways that would matter to a reader Taiwan's status is the same as that of a country like the United States. The only ways where its status differs are highly esoteric and don't really impact people's real lives (for example if we go by passport recongition and visa requirements Taiwan's international status is higher than China's, see the Henley Passport Index). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's more similar to asking whether West Berlin was a country. While it was claimed by the Federal Republic of Germany, the Federal Republic had no control over it. Despite its not being a country, itx citizens probably would have had an easier time crossing borders than citizens of the German Democratic Republic, certainly before it gained international recognition. TFD (talk) 18:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- West Berlin didn't issue passports, the Federal Republic of Germany issued passports to residents of West Berlin. On West Berlin documents alone they couldn't do much. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:42, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Until 2023, he ROC issued passports to anyone born in China, who were considered citizens of the ROC. And when the ROC finally liberates the mainland, no doubt they will do so again.
- And just as the FRG issued passports for West Berliners, the PRC issues passports for Chinese born in Taiwan. TFD (talk) 04:30, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think your statement "Until 2023, the ROC issued passports to anyone born in China" is factually correct.--108.53.191.58 (talk) 05:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- No, Taiwanese are issued an RoC passport with rare exception. In order to have a PRC passport someone would have to give up their Taiwanese citizenship. Its also not easy to get residency/citizenship in the RoC if you're from the PRC, if it was as automatic as you say why didn't the CCP just send 30 million civilians to Taiwan and vote the independent parties out? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think Horse Eye's Back's point is that the political status of Taiwan is far less relevant for the purpose of the first paragraph of this article. The passport example illustrates that; and in the same way we would not highlight passport access there (though more highly relevant for the average reader), we would not include the partial recognition of the state. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- West Berlin didn't issue passports, the Federal Republic of Germany issued passports to residents of West Berlin. On West Berlin documents alone they couldn't do much. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:42, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think passport benefits are a way to measure country's status. Your argument assumes that good passport benefits are a sufficient condition for country's status. In fact, they are two different things. Unless you can find a reliable source, I would consider this to be original research. And if that's the case, Hong Kong passports also have more visa-free access to more countries than mainland China passports, and there are regional and subnational passports. ZeehanLin (talk) 14:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Let us move on from this because you are simply disagreeing without offering compelling arguments at this point, and the discussion is not going anywhere besides an overwhelming agreement that the limited recognition construct is to be excluded from the first sentence. Butterdiplomat (talk) 14:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Passport power" is a widely accepted metric.[21] Taiwan's passport is not a regional or subnational one. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's more similar to asking whether West Berlin was a country. While it was claimed by the Federal Republic of Germany, the Federal Republic had no control over it. Despite its not being a country, itx citizens probably would have had an easier time crossing borders than citizens of the German Democratic Republic, certainly before it gained international recognition. TFD (talk) 18:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would agree with Horse Eye's Back on this. Pretty much everyone recognizes the PRC as the sole govt of China and they look at Taiwan as simply Taiwan. Them arguing over the name China and who controls what doesn't matter to most people or countries. Taiwan is a member of the WTO and APEC, they have heavy trade negotiations with South Asia, Australia, and New Zealand. It has 23 million people, is the 22nd largest economy in the world, and a heavy producer of refined metals and semiconductors. So except for the fine print of their relation with China, they get treated like a normal country except at the UN... the fine print doesn't impact peoples lives. While it is a state, and editors for years have gone back and forth at Wikipedia on whether it's a sovereign state, the term "country" was determined by consensus here to be the best fit as an all-around term to describe Taiwan. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Can you name any countries that recognize the Taipai government and also recognize the PRC government as the legitimate government of China? TFD (talk) 17:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- The United States for one. The US government treats Taiwan as a country, not as a part of China (for example we sell Taiwan copious quantities of weapons, but weapons exports to China or Chinese territories are illegal under US law). They recongize the Taipei as the legitimate government of Taiwan/the Taiwanese people and the Beijing government as the legitimate government of China/the Chinese people. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- As does the UK. They do their trades as if Taiwan is any other country. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- As does China, which imposes tariffs on Taiwanese goods. The whole fiction of recognizing vs. not recognizing is much less directly important than all of these trade negotiations and real-world interactions between countries. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- And that's what most of us are trying to say. The recognition is of minimal impact except in the UN. Far and away Taiwan is treated and handled just like every other country, even with regards to the international water rules of the Taiwan Strait and Taiwan's 12-mile exclusionary zone (which China respects). But in the UN and a couple other instances "official" recognition can't happen because we aren't allowed to "officially" recognize both countries. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- IOW no countries both recognize the Taipei government and recognize the PRC as the government of China. The U.S. in fact says it opposes Taiwan independence.
- The fact that a territory in rebellion trades with people in other countries is not evidence those countries recognize its independence. The UK traded with the Confederate States of America, the German Democratic Republic traded with countries that did not recognize it, and Afghanistan has foreign trade.
- Many sub-national units and overseas territories carry on foreign relations of some sort. The Canadian province of Ontario has an agent-general in Washington who advocates "for Ontario’s interests with senior United States of America government officials." TFD (talk) 20:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that I would call the PRC a territory in rebellion against the RoC although I would agree that it once was... That seems like a rather dated position. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- No one would call Taiwan a territory in rebellion. And of course the US opposes independence... that would start a war as China said they would attack Taiwan. And of course no countries both recognize the Taipei government and recognize the PRC as the government of China... it's pretty much impossible if you want to trade with both... China won't allow it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide a source that the U.S. recognizes the ROC. Several countries in fact recognize the ROC, but they don't recognize the PRC.
- Also, if the U.S, opposes independence, it means they do not recognize Taiwan as an independent country.
- The fact that there is a Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States and an American Institute in Taiwan prove nothing. They provide consular services and promote trade and culture. They are not embassies. The U,S. and Bermuda exchange consuls, it does not mean the U.S. recognizes Bermudan independence. TFD (talk) 21:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- We are not disputing that the ROC has limited recognition by states like the U.S. or at the UN. We are saying that this partial recognition status is by far less important than a myriad of other facts about the country. For that reason, we do not reference it in the first sentence. Rather, we explain it in a later paragraph and also in more relevant articles. In other examples perhaps, a lack of recognition (plus lack of other things) means that a place may not be called a country or sovereign state. That is not the case here, and in any case is not within the scope of this RfC. I agree with Phlar that this RfC should be closed. Butterdiplomat (talk) 22:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Can you name any countries that recognize the Taipai government and also recognize the PRC government as the legitimate government of China? TFD (talk) 17:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- The scope of the RfC is simple: to add "with limited recognitions" (sic) to the first sentence and short description of this article. There's a clear consensus among responding editors OPPOSED to this change. Any discussion as to whether or not Taiwan is a country, etc., etc. is beyond the scope of this RfC. The RfC should be closed. Phlar (talk) 20:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial#Moral and political points of view:
We should then list all points of view, according to their importance, and, if possible, be precise as to who holds them. There exist some cases where the vast majority of political parties, politicians and journalists hold a certain opinion, while a sizeable minority do not: both views should be stated.
Wikipedia aims to describe disputes, but not engage in them. The aim is to inform, not influence.
Avoid stating opinions as facts.
Usually, articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects. However, these opinions should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Rather, they should be attributed in the text to particular sources, or where justified, described as widespread views, etc.
Among the many controversies, the view that Taiwan is a country is just one of many. As far as the current situation is concerned, the first sentence of the current entry directly engages in the controversy, directly and arbitrarily acknowledging Taiwan's status as a country and stating this opinion as facts. Not both views were stated. Some people will say that we reached consensus in the 2020 RfC. In Wikipedia:Neutral point of view:
This policy is non-negotiable, and the principles upon which it is based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, nor by editor consensus.
To sum up, it can be concluded that the current statement in the first sentence is problematic. Although the subsequent statement about the contentious political status of Taiwan is correct, it does not prevent the first sentence from being problematic. Since NPOV is a non-negotiable policy, I hope our subsequent discussion will be based on NPOV. ZeehanLin (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- You have not offered up a new argument. Please introduce a new idea for others to consider, or otherwise refrain from accusing other editors of violating policy. Butterdiplomat (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- ...Your words make me at a loss for words. If I'm not contributing new ideas, who came up with the ideas in this RfC?ZeehanLin (talk) 18:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's may be better to say:
Regarding the term political entity, people who have different opinions on whether Taiwan is a country all agree that Taiwan is a political entity:Taiwan is a disputed political entity in East Asia.
- Curtis, John; Ward, Matthew; King, Winnie (28 March 2024). "Taiwan: History, politics and UK relations". UK Parliament. UK: UK Parliament.
This is a remnant of a political entity formed on the Chinese mainland more than 100 years ago.
- "The impact of political entity on confidence in legal authorities: A comparison between China and Taiwan". ScienceDirect. ScienceDirect. 16 July 2010. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.06.010.
The current study compared the public confidence in legal authorities in two different political entities: China and Taiwan.
- Yang, Kai-Huang (October, ROC 98). "政治定位之討論: 兩岸關係60年" [The Discussion on Political Status Cross Taiwan Strait over 60 years] (PDF). 展望與探索 (in Chinese (Taiwan)). 7 (10). Taiwan.
1991年中華民國的「國家統一綱領」,提出「互不否認對方為政治實體」
{{cite journal}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help) - Wang, Yingjin (2016-02-09). "论统一前的两岸政治关系定位" (in Chinese (China)). CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN STUDIES AT RENMIN UNIVERSITY OF CHINA.
相对于大陆政权而言,其为一个自治政治实体
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - Huang, Zhilian (1995-07). "告別不了中國的「政治實體」". 海峽評論 (in Chinese (Taiwan)) (55). Taiwan: 《海峽評論》雜誌社. ISSN 1018-1075.
雙方存在著的嚴重政治分歧,是在於台灣這個「政治實體」的發展大動向之上。
{{cite journal}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help) - "REQUEST FOR THE INCLUSION OF AN ITEM IN THE PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE FIFTIETH SESSION" (PDF). UNITED NATIONS. UNITED NATIONS. 19 July 1995.
For a period of 22 years, from 1950 to 1971, the United Nations considered the question of the representation of two politically dissimilar entities in China.
- "Office of the President Clarifies Reports on President Lee's Remarks". Taiwan: Office of the President, Republic of China. 1997-11-10.
The Republic of China is a political entity dedicated to freedom, peace, democracy, fairness and justice.
- Chen, Yu-Hua (09 April 2016). "Recognising the Republic of China". East Asia Forum. East Asia Forum.
it means that Beijing does not recognise the existence of the ROC, the political entity that presides over Taiwan and other islands such as Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and the Taiping or Itu Aba Island in the South China Sea.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help) - Lin, Gang. "台湾研究半世情" (in Chinese (China)). Shanghai, China: Center for Taiwan Studies, Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
两岸的"鸡蛋之争",可以理解为两个政治实体之间的"分庭抗礼"。"分庭"就是客观上存在着两个互不隶属、各自管辖内部事务的政权,双方互不干涉对方的内部事务;"抗礼"就是两岸政府在宪法和国际法的意义上并不承认对方是另一主权实体,也就是法理上互不承认。
- "中華民國自一九一二年肇建至今,國祚從未間斷;且中華人民共和國自一九四九年成立以來,其治權未曾及於台灣,台海兩岸由兩個政治實體分治,乃不爭之事實,台灣絕非中華人民共和國之一部分" (in Chinese (Taiwan)). Taiwan: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China (Taiwan). 2003-07-10.
台海兩岸由兩個政治實體分治
- Chen, Kuide (2024-01-19). "专栏 中国透视:台湾大选 开辟新命". rfa (in Chinese (China)). rfa.
诚然,作为两个政治实体,中华民国与中华人民共和国在长达74年时间里,基本上是相互隔绝独立演化的。
- ...
- Curtis, John; Ward, Matthew; King, Winnie (28 March 2024). "Taiwan: History, politics and UK relations". UK Parliament. UK: UK Parliament.
- ZeehanLin (talk) 08:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- You are pursuing a very particular terminology change as if it is the sole determiner of POV. You continue to ignore literally everything beyond the first sentence of the article. We decide terminology based on English language usage, full stop. We decided in WP:TWRFC, and so that's what we will continue to do. Remsense诉 08:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
You continue to ignore literally everything beyond the first sentence of the article.
—Yeah, because the first sentence is problematic but others is not. ZeehanLin (talk) 08:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)- The meaning of a sentence is informed by the surrounding context, and are not read in isolation. If you are not going to be satisfied unless we call Taiwan something other than a country or overload it with things that are explained very soon thereafter, then you are not going to get what you want here. Remsense诉 08:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I will defend to the death my right to say it ZeehanLin (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- To say what? We're talking about what the article could say, which no one has any particular ownership over. Remsense诉 08:50, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- If A is B and A is not B is a controversial topic, you should not say "A is B. But the statement that A is B is controversial" when describing A. You should say: "Whether A is B is controversial." ZeehanLin (talk) 12:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I will defend to the death my right to say it ZeehanLin (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- The meaning of a sentence is informed by the surrounding context, and are not read in isolation. If you are not going to be satisfied unless we call Taiwan something other than a country or overload it with things that are explained very soon thereafter, then you are not going to get what you want here. Remsense诉 08:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- If “This policy is non-negotiable” does not apply to you, then it is meaningless and useless to discuss it with you. ZeehanLin (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Policies apply to articles, not every sentence in sequence. One cannot insist this vehemently that NPOV is being violated if you read the entire lead. Remsense诉 08:42, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- To reiterate: we represent every opinion on what Taiwan is throughout the article, and we use the language that our sources say: we choose what terminology to use based on English language sources, which describe Taiwan as a country. Remsense诉 08:58, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Policies apply to articles, not every sentence in sequence. One cannot insist this vehemently that NPOV is being violated if you read the entire lead. Remsense诉 08:42, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
the sole determiner of POV
--If you have a better term, please suggest it. Also, regardingEnglish usage
, I just used multiple languages to prove that nearly everyone supports this term, and you should be able to see that there is also English usage here. You give me the feeling that you are refuting in order to keep it as it is, if so, please don't do that. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)- Nearly everyone? A handful of sources from each category does not prove this term is neutral for "nearly everyone", merely a proficiency at cherrypicking—that's why we judge based on what the whole body of reliable sources says, which is what happened at WP:TWRFC. Using this method, you could likely try to argue that the United States should be referred to as a "parking lot". Remsense诉 12:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- To reiterate: changing what Taiwan is referred to is not up for discussion beyond having another massive RfC, which will come to the same conclusion because the sources haven't changes and the policies haven't changed. Please be more considerate that we face this question constantly. Remsense诉 12:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- As for whether the term "political entity" is appropriate, you can raise your point of view to improve it. But I think everyone should know how much controversy there is over whether Taiwan is a country.
- I would like to add that "political entity" is a term that does not contradict the term "country", which means that it can be called a political entity regardless of whether it is a country or not. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- The clear majority of English-language sources call Taiwan a country. It is not our job to change that because a minority of English-language sources disagree. That is not explicitly not how NPOV works: we represent all sources, but we do not refrain from differing from minority-view sources. We take the majority position, and give the others their due. If we refrained from calling Taiwan a country, that would be giving undue weight to sources that disagree, and that would be a POV violation. Remsense诉 12:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I will refer the ROC/Taiwan as sovereign state instead of vague term “country” if my personal views are counted. As “country” has been agreed upon general consensus, which should be upheld by either sides, we do not make such decision based on personal preference. Sheherherhers (talk) 13:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nearly everyone? A handful of sources from each category does not prove this term is neutral for "nearly everyone", merely a proficiency at cherrypicking—that's why we judge based on what the whole body of reliable sources says, which is what happened at WP:TWRFC. Using this method, you could likely try to argue that the United States should be referred to as a "parking lot". Remsense诉 12:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand why some members of the Admin User Group always act so superior and stick to their own opinions even though there are policies and guidelines to rely on. ZeehanLin (talk) 08:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- No admins have participated in this conversation. Remsense诉 08:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Precisely, some patrollers ZeehanLin (talk) 08:52, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you have grievances about user conduct, go to WP:ANI about it, and restrict things here to content, please. Remsense诉 08:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- You wrote above, "The meaning of a sentence is informed by the surrounding context." Doesn't that apply to words as well? TFD (talk) 11:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Correct, that's how language works. Remsense诉 11:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- If A is B and A is not B is a controversial topic, you should not say "A is B. But the statement that A is B is controversial" when describing A. You should say: "Whether A is B is controversial." ZeehanLin (talk) 12:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- And it's not controversial: the vast majority of English-language sources call it a country. That's it. Remsense诉 12:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think you could just write "the vast majority of English-language sources call it a country" in the article. Because
Wikipedia aims to describe disputes, but not engage in them
(WP:WIKIVOICE). ZeehanLin (talk) 13:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)Avoid stating opinions as facts.
(WP:WIKIVOICE) ZeehanLin (talk) 13:45, 3 August 2024 (UTC)- This is my last reply here, since I haven't specifically addressed this point: a statement of fact can be disagreed upon, but that is crucially not the same thing as an opinion. An opinion is saying Taiwan is illegitimate or legitimate; sources do not treat the assertion as "country" as a statement of opinion. Remsense诉 15:02, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- According to WP:ASSERT:
Given the dispute, this is an opinion. ZeehanLin (talk) 16:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)Fact (e.g., information that is accepted as true and about which there is no serious dispute)
Opinion (e.g., a matter which is subject to serious dispute or commonly considered to be subjective)
- This is my last reply here, since I haven't specifically addressed this point: a statement of fact can be disagreed upon, but that is crucially not the same thing as an opinion. An opinion is saying Taiwan is illegitimate or legitimate; sources do not treat the assertion as "country" as a statement of opinion. Remsense诉 15:02, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think you could just write "the vast majority of English-language sources call it a country" in the article. Because
- And it's not controversial: the vast majority of English-language sources call it a country. That's it. Remsense诉 12:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- You wrote above, "The meaning of a sentence is informed by the surrounding context." Doesn't that apply to words as well? TFD (talk) 11:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you have grievances about user conduct, go to WP:ANI about it, and restrict things here to content, please. Remsense诉 08:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- You are pursuing a very particular terminology change as if it is the sole determiner of POV. You continue to ignore literally everything beyond the first sentence of the article. We decide terminology based on English language usage, full stop. We decided in WP:TWRFC, and so that's what we will continue to do. Remsense诉 08:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- But is not calling it a country not taking the PRC's side? Slatersteven (talk) 12:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- This can also be said that the view that Taiwan is a country is more biased towards supporters of Taiwan independence.
- I would like to remind you that only PRC and ROC people really care about these differences. Others basically just follow one side. However, some Wikipedia editors may be motivated by the attitude of maintaining stability. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- We care about policies—I actually quite like fixing when major articles get something really wrong. No need to assume what secret motivations other editors may have. Remsense诉 12:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- nothing new here… just worth mentioning that even in Chinese language Wikipedia, the current version the ROC topic also defines the polity as “民主共和国”(democratic republic nation), it’s not only the English version making such definitions, so stop your accusations of pointing every opposition as “bias”. If you won’t able to reach consensus on the Chinese Wikipedia, how come we should accept your version of story instead of general consensus?? Sheherherhers (talk) 12:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- The Chinese Wikipedia is currently discussing the changes. As the discussion is not over, no changes can be made. The discussion there is not nearly as one-sided as the English Wikipedia. Supporters on both sides are evenly matched there. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Your version of story
--I hope you can stop saying this. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)- This is why I wish Sheherhers hadn't thought to bring this up, though I know she was trying to get through to someone: it does not matter in the slightest what any other language wiki has, ever. They are editorially independent from us. Remsense诉 14:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- The Chinese Wikipedia is currently discussing the changes. As the discussion is not over, no changes can be made. The discussion there is not nearly as one-sided as the English Wikipedia. Supporters on both sides are evenly matched there. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that is kind of my point, There is no real NPOV here, as both sides have one that are mutually exclusive. Slatersteven (talk) 12:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- But after thinking about it, I realized that there is a difference between "not calling it a country" and "calling it is not a country".The former seems vague, while the latter is definitely taking PRC's side. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:23, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Both do. as (in effect) not calling it a country accepts the PRC's claims that is is not. Now of course we are trying to give both sides version, as we also do not say that hte PRC is not a country, nor do we say that the ROC is the government of China. We are in fact trying to be fair to both sides. Slatersteven (talk) 13:45, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think both do.
Although this statement is a deliberate avoidance of controversy, at least I don't feel that the author is biased towards one side or the other. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)Taiwan is an island in the South China Sea.[1]
- The word island simply refers to the geography, but the source tells about politics. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think both do.
- Both do. as (in effect) not calling it a country accepts the PRC's claims that is is not. Now of course we are trying to give both sides version, as we also do not say that hte PRC is not a country, nor do we say that the ROC is the government of China. We are in fact trying to be fair to both sides. Slatersteven (talk) 13:45, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Guys, I have a suggestion to review both of the terminology of the ROC and PRC pages for the same criterion, if you want to make it “fair”, let’s be fair. Sheherherhers (talk) 14:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I get you're trying to have some ground everyone can accept, but the point about "fairness" is another pitfall: we should not determine one article's adequacy based on what another says. Interarticle consistency is secondary to internal correctness Remsense诉 14:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- But after thinking about it, I realized that there is a difference between "not calling it a country" and "calling it is not a country".The former seems vague, while the latter is definitely taking PRC's side. ZeehanLin (talk) 13:23, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Consensus is clear, and this waster of everyone's time needs closing, as it’s not going to change anything. Slatersteven (talk) 14:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with Slatersteven here. Consensus is clear especially considering WP:DUE, and no new points were introduced. The proposals are getting closer to WP:DONTLIKEIT and steering further and further away from reason and civility. Butterdiplomat (talk) 14:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral point of view does not mean no point of view, is the fundamental misunderstanding here. The suggestion is essentially to invent a new novel category of polity to put Taiwan into because it seems to lie between what the imagined extreme positions are, which is not what any but a very small number of sources consider it to be. We will not do that, because it is a synthetic, dishonest thing to do that is useful to nobody. We repeat what sources say, not what we think they more or less all can live with if you squint. That is not how tertiary analysis works. Remsense诉 14:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I would like to know whether this consensus complies with the provisions of WP:NPOV for the reasons mentioned above. If it does not, then this consensus is invalid according to the provisions. This is also the reason why you often say that I “disrespect consensus”. ZeehanLin (talk) 16:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- One final thing: is there an answer you will accept here? What would we actually have to show or explain to you where you would accept the article as written? We've explained what NPOV means in practice (i.e. expressing each position proportionally, but not averaging them into a compromise position that we feel would make everyone happy), we've explained how it's been applied here and elsewhere, and you have not accepted a single sentence of it. Remsense诉 16:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think ChatGPT's statement is neutral.
Q: What is Taiwan?
A:
Taiwan, officially known as the Republic of China (ROC), is an island located in East Asia. It lies between the East and South China Seas in the northwestern Pacific Ocean, with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to the northwest, Japan to the northeast, and the Philippines to the south.
Taiwan has a complex history and political status. It was originally inhabited by indigenous peoples and later saw significant Han Chinese immigration. It was a Dutch colony in the 17th century, then part of the Qing Dynasty, and later a Japanese colony from 1895 until the end of World War II. After the Chinese Civil War, the ROC government retreated to Taiwan in 1949.
Today, Taiwan operates as a self-governing entity with its own government, military, and constitution. However, its political status is contentious, with the PRC claiming Taiwan as part of its territory and refusing to establish diplomatic relations with countries that recognize the ROC.
Would you like to know more about Taiwan’s culture, economy, or its current political situation?
Q: Why is Taiwan an island not a country?
Taiwan’s status is complex and often debated. Here are some key points to understand:
1.Geographical and Historical Context: Taiwan is an island located in East Asia. Historically, it has been under various rules, including Dutch, Qing Dynasty, and Japanese control.
2.Political Status: After the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the Republic of China (ROC) government retreated to Taiwan. Since then, Taiwan has operated as a self-governing entity with its own government, military, and constitution12. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) claims Taiwan as part of its territory and insists that it is not a separate country.
3.International Recognition: Taiwan is not widely recognized as a sovereign state. Most countries, including the United Nations, do not officially recognize Taiwan as an independent country due to the “One China” policy, which acknowledges the PRC’s claim over Taiwan.
4.De Facto Independence: Despite the lack of formal recognition, Taiwan functions like an independent country in many ways. It has its own democratic government, economy, and participates in international organizations under various names.
In summary, while Taiwan operates independently and has many characteristics of a country, its political status remains disputed, primarily due to the PRC’s claims and the international community’s adherence to the “One China” policy.
Would you like to explore more about Taiwan’s current political situation or its cultural aspects?- I don’t think OpenAI has any vested interest in China or Taiwan, not to mention that ChatGPT is available in Taiwan but not in China.
- Please note: ChatGPT's answers are only used to show what I consider to be neutral descriptions. According to relevant policies, this cannot be used as any reason for editing and discussion, information source, or other purposes. ZeehanLin (talk) 16:45, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Unbelievable. Remsense诉 16:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Your proposal and rationale were addressed at the top of the discussion. Remsense has also clarified many of our position on NPOV. Please review WP:DUE and WP:BLUDGEON, and I think we can all move on from this topic at this stage. Butterdiplomat (talk) 16:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- One final thing: is there an answer you will accept here? What would we actually have to show or explain to you where you would accept the article as written? We've explained what NPOV means in practice (i.e. expressing each position proportionally, but not averaging them into a compromise position that we feel would make everyone happy), we've explained how it's been applied here and elsewhere, and you have not accepted a single sentence of it. Remsense诉 16:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 July 2024
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Taiwan is not a country, as it is part of one china policy. They are now under unsettled civil war. If taiwan is a country, which country in the world acknowledge that? I dont know, and my country Indonesia does not recoqnize taiwan as a country, along with other south east asian nations. 103.147.8.217 (talk) 13:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- See talk page archive. Slatersteven (talk) 13:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- It may be worth reiterating that Wikipedia, by virtue of not being a government, does not adhere to any specific foreign policy such as the One China policy, which generally applies to governments who wish to engage with the PRC by acknowledging the PRC stance on Taiwan — this would be a political stance. Wikipedia already describes the situation as is and notes the political recognition or lack thereof extensively. Butterdiplomat (talk) 23:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 August 2024
[edit]![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change “Lee and Wang Chi-lin became the first pair in badminton history to win the men’s doubles twice after an intense 21-17, 18-21, 21-19 victory over the People’s Republic of China’s Liang Weikeng and Wang Chang at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 on Sunday, 4 August.” to “Lee and Wang Chi-lin made history as the first pair to win the men’s doubles twice, securing a 21-17, 18-21, 21-19 victory over Liang Weikeng and Wang Chang of the People’s Republic of China at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 on Sunday, August 4.” NaveemLife (talk) 18:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- For clarity, adding this visual diff for those reviewing:
Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)− Lee and Wang Chi-linbecamethefirstpairinbadmintonhistoryto win the men’s doublestwiceafteranintense21-17, 18-21, 21-19 victory overthePeople’sRepublicofChina’sLiangWeikengandWangChangat the Olympic Games Paris 2024 on Sunday,4August.+ Lee and Wang Chi-lin made history as the first pair to win the men’s doubles twice, securing a 21-17, 18-21, 21-19 victory over Liang Weikeng and Wang Chang of the People’s Republic of China at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 on Sunday, August 4.- What section is this in? I do not see this blurb in the article. Butterdiplomat (talk) 10:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Not done: I cannot find the referenced original text to be changed in the article. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I added to Sport in Taiwan instead because that article is better for these kinds of records and there was already a sentence about their previous gold in Tokyo. Vacosea (talk) 13:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- ^ Curtis, John; Ward, Matthew; King, Winnie (28 March 2024). "Taiwan: History, politics and UK relations". UK Parliament. UK: UK Parliament.
Taiwan is an island in the South China Sea.
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists
- Delisted good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Former good article nominees
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press
- Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report
- B-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Geography
- B-Class level-3 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles in Geography
- B-Class vital articles in Geography
- B-Class Asia articles
- Top-importance Asia articles
- WikiProject Asia articles
- B-Class China-related articles
- Top-importance China-related articles
- B-Class China-related articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- B-Class country articles
- WikiProject Countries articles
- B-Class Islands articles
- WikiProject Islands articles
- B-Class Limited recognition articles
- High-importance Limited recognition articles
- WikiProject Limited recognition articles
- B-Class Taiwan articles
- Top-importance Taiwan articles
- WikiProject Taiwan articles